


1 



<£££>„; 



KTOCy 



c mL < 





K^^B ( -f£ v c^il ■ '^-^K^H *H 












Es 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 


| 


A 


Shelf. -/£-5" 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 









«: «? 



^? 



CC 


^K 




CC cc 






CC 


^■r 


** c 


cc 


^w 


' < 


CC 


' *i 


C' 






CC 


: <^£^ 


« 


C ^^ < 


< cc 

\ x cC 


«Cc 


■ «c :c 


* OC*c 


«cT 


CC c 


Cc 


CC c 


Cc 




c < 


c c 


< <z c 




< 




CC c 


r cc 


CC C 


C\ c 


CC c 



' cc c 



cc c 


v < C C 


<. c 


c c 


i* c<; 


< c 


c c 


c«c 


c c 


< 


K<yi 


S3i^E 


< c 


cc 


cCC 


<C c 


c<^ 


CC 
ccc 


c<sc 


cC C i 


CCC 


CC 


C< c c 


c«co 


c c 


cc C 


CCC 


C c 


cc 


c cc 


cc C C 




^v < 


c cc 


CCC 


<C 


CCC 


cc c c 


<C 


c cc 


cc C c 


« 


ccc 


c~ « 


<C 


ccic 


c < 


« 


<~ <L « 




<T 


ccc 


c <r< 


<c 


CCC( 


cc c < 




cc: c 

^<Z c< 


**>! 




^5^ o< 


t c c 
c c 


<Z 


<r<Z cc . 


C CC 


«c . 


cc Cc 




<T 


«Z CC < 


K C 


c c 


C Cc 


G c 


c <; 
C 

c 

c 


c< cc 
C CC' 4 
C Cc 

<C Cc 

C CO 


Cc C 

CL c 
cc c 

Cc C 


c 


O OC 


Cc c 


c 


c cc 


*rc 


< 


c <: < 


v<n 


c 


c CC 


«cc 


CC c 


c CC 


CC 


cc c 


? cc 


ccc 


cc c 

<c c 


<r - << 


CCc 


c c c 


CC < 


CC c 


r cc 


CCc 


<c 


< c 


c <r< 


cc 


C O "< 


Cdc 


«C 


< cc 


<c c Cc 


«C 


cc 


.«■■ CCc 





C C C c c 


<: c 


4 


C CC cc c C 


C 


c c C v c « 


<Tc 


4 


C C C c c < 


■c 


< < c < 






*c • . < < < < 


C 


c c c 


CX 




^- CC c c 


*^ 


c < c 


•-^T- c 


^ 


5C-. «- <: C o < 




c c c 


-CTc 




C CO cc C 




ccc 


( . 


<: < 


c cC , ^ 




CCC 


c c c 


C * 


C CO cc c 




c < c 


c < 


c 


c c < c 




c <c c 


c c c 


c 


c c < C 




C,cc Cc- 


CC 


C 


c c< -< c 




C < C 


c «. 


c 


c. ^ c < 




C< < C 


c < 


<<^ 


c c c c 




Cc < C C 


<~ c ^ 


<< 


C c C c 




Cc « x < 


c c 


< 


c^ <: c 




C c « c 


<Zc < 


• c 


C < <c 




c c C 


o CC cc 


cC 


C C cc • CC 




C <'C c« 


C< Cv 


cC 


C C CC c <. 




<r< <c cc 


«■ CC c v 


f <c 


C c Cv c c 




* <c C' 


c^ 


c 


c < c< c c 


4 


C^ c c< c 


cc c < 


CC 


Cc c c c 


4 


re c cc c 


< C C c ' ' 


c cc. 


ccc 


^ 


<c c 


' ^C < v 


cC 


S < c c c < c 


« 


r c < cc c 


C C 


<C 


c ^ ^ r ^ 


4 


<C C 


Cc 


<c 


c c <^ c , 5 / 


c 


c c <C C 


C C c 


<c 


c 


cc c 


c < 


cc 


CC .'/cc^c 


~c 


< CCC C 


Cc 


<C < 


< cc ^ c<rc 

c oc c cere: 


c 


c CC c c 


c < 


<^ < 


c 


C CC^ 


CC 


^ c 


' cc ccocic • 


c 


c CCC < 


* v^ 




CC cCCQT *( 


c 


C CCC c 




^C ' 


c cc .< c^r^c 


c 


c ccc 




^c 


< < c< x ^mr" V" 




ca.RiCE.-» 







F AC-SI MILE OF TITLE PAGE TYNDALE'S NEW TESTAMENT. 



OUR 



oixty-Six Sacred Books 



HOW THEY CAME TO US, AND WHAT THEY ARE. 



A POPULAR HAND-BOOK FOR COLLEGES, SUNDAY-SCHOOLS, 
NORMAL CLASSES AND STUDENTS, ON THE ORIGIN, AU- 
THORSHIP, PRESERVATION, CHARACTER AND DIVINE 
AUTHORITY OF THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES. 



By EDWIN W. RICE, D.D. 



NOV 3 1391 
PHILADELPHIA SHltJfW 
THE AMERICAN SUNDAY-SCHOOL UNION, 



1122 Chestnut Street. 
New York : 8 & 10 Bible House. 



(L 



V 









INTRODUCTORY NOTE. 



The members of a Bible Study Circle, composed of ad- 
vanced students and teachers, requested the author to give 
a series of lessons or studies upon the origin, authorship, 
preservation, character and divine authority of the books 
of the Bible. These lectures were afterward written out 
and issued in The Sunday-School World. The kindly recep- 
tion given to the studies, and the call for them by a wider 
circle of Bible students, has led the author to revise, en- 
large and adapt them to more general use. His hope is 
that they may lead to a more intelligent knowledge of our 
sacred books, and a more reverent faith in the Christian 
Scriptures. 

Edwin W. Rice. 
Philadelphia, October, 1891. 



[Copyright, 1891, by The American Sunday-School Union.] 



CHAPTER I. 

THE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND KING JAMES VERSIONS. 

Introduction, i. The three foremost nations of the 
world in: (i) literature and learning; (2) science and dis- 
covery; (3) commerce and wealth, are Christian. They 
are Great Britain, Germany and the United States of 
America. 

2. Ask these three great nations for their greatest book 
in respect of:(i) its circulation and popularity; (2) its 
influence on their national life ; (3) its deep hold on the 
heart of the people, and they will unhesitatingly and 
unitedly answer, The Bible. 1 

3. The educated Mongolian or Malayan is eager to know 
about this great book. The inquiring Asiatic mind bristles 
with questions. What kind of a book is that Bible? 
What is it about ? How did you get it ? Who wrote it ? 
How long ago was it written ? For whom was it made ? 
Has everyone in Christian lands a copy ? Is it found in 
other languages? In how many? How was it written? 
How preserved? Who translated it into your Christian 
tongues ? Why is it not found in all languages ? Even 
among Christians, thoughtful and wise, these and a hundred 

1 Bible comes from the Greek Biblia, plural of Bib lion, " little book," 
a diminutive of Biblos, " book." The Latin plural also, Bzb/za, is used 
by Chaucer in Canterbury Tales, and by Wyckliffe in the Preface to 
his translation, and as a title by Coverdale. 

(?) 



8 THE ANGLO- AMERICAN AND ' 

other questions start up demanding intelligent answers. 
In fact, every Christian ought to have some knowledge of 
the history, the origin, contents, and purpose of the great- 
est book in Christendom. These questions are worthy of 
scholarly and clear answers. Let us address ourselves to 
them. We will trace the history of the book up the stream 
of time. Beginning with what is most familiar and best 
known we will proceed step by step to what is less known. 

4. The Anglo-American Version. The latest English 
translation of the Bible is the Anglo-American or Re- 
vised Version, printed at Oxford and Cambridge, Eng- 
land, 1 881-1885. It is known as the Anglo-American or 
Revised Version to distinguish it from the Common Version 
frequently called also the Authorized Version, and the King 
James Version} 

5. A revision of the Common Version was suggested by 
Prof. Selwyn in 1856, but not then approved by scholars. 
It was again urged by Bishops Wilberforce, Ellicott, Olli- 
vant, and others of England, in 1870, and a committee 
of 16 (8 from each house) was appointed by the Convoca- 
tion of Canterbury, with authority to invite other eminent 
Biblical scholars to join them in the revision. 2 A com- 
mittee of American scholars of all the leading Protestant 
bodies of America (as in Great Britain) was formed in 
1871, to co-operate with the British committees in revis- 

1 It is called the Common Version because it is the English transla- 
tion now most widely used by English-speaking people ; the Author- 
ized Version because it was supposed (but erroneously) to have been 
formally approved or authorized by royal authority, and King James 

Version because it was made during the reign of James I., King of 
England. 

2 The Convocation of York declined to join in the revision, but many 
of the greatest scholars of England, Scotland and America were en- 
gaged in the work. 



KING JAMES VERSIONS. 9 

ing the Common Version of the Bible of 1611. The whole 
number of scholars engaged upon the Revised Version was 
101, of whom 67 were British, and 34 American. 1 

6. The revision of the New Testament was completed in 
1 88 1 and issued May 17 in England and May 20 in America. 
The Old Testament was finished and the entire revised Bible 
issued in May, 1885. The issue of the revised New Testa- 
ment in 1 88 1 awakened a profound interest among all Eng- 
lish-speaking peoples. "It is the literary event of this 
century," says Schaff. Millions of copies were sold in a 
few months. 2 More than twenty reprints at once appeared 
in the United States. For once popular interest in the 
newspapers was supplanted by that in the revised Scrip- 
tures. 3 The revised New Testament was sought by crowds 
at the bookstores and news stands ; it was hawked on the 
streets, and read on the cars, in the omnibus and in the 
stage coach. The entire text of the revised Testament was 
telegraphed to two daily newspapers in Chicago and printed 
complete in morning editions ! When the revised Old 
Testament was completed four years later the entire revised 
Bible was issued, but its advent awakened comparatively 
little interest. Public curiosity and excitement exhausted 
itself apparently upon the New Testament. 

7. Why Revise the King James Version ? — (1) To remove 
obsolete words and phrases, as "let" in the sense of 
"hinder;" "ear" meaning " to plow ; " "prevent" in 



1 The active members (in 1879) were 79> namely, British 52, Amer- 
ican 27. See Bible Revision, Philadelphia, pp. 10- 1 2. 

2 Oxford had orders for a million of copies before publication ; 
Cambridge probably for as many more. Two million copies were sold 
in London. Nearly half a million were sold in New York and Phila- 
delphia, besides many American reprints published soon after its com- 
pletion. 

3 See Schaff, Companion to Greek Testament, p. 403 ff. 



10 THE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND 

the sense of "going before j" "carriages" meaning 
" baggage " or " luggage." (2) To give the meaning of 
the original with greater precision, to keep step with the 
progress of knowledge in the Greek and Hebrew of the 
original Scriptures. (3) To conform to a purer text now 
attained. More than 500 valuable MSS, a score of An- 
cient Versions, and writings of 100 Christian Fathers have 
been examined and collated, in order to perfect the origi- 
nal text of Scripture. 

8. Will the Revision be Generally Accepted? — Time alone 
can definitely answer. It is widely used with the Common 
Version in Sunday-school lesson helps; some prominent re- 
ligious journals use it instead of the Common Version, 
and eminent Biblical scholars constantly refer to it in criti- 
cal works. It has not, however, come into very general 
use among the people, nor among the churches. 1 

9 . Objections to the Revised Version. — Three serious obsta- 
cles exist in the popular mind to its general introduction : 
(1) The omissions and changes in passages long familiar 
and of forms of expression deeply endeared to the Chris- 
tian heart. 2 (2) Printing the text in paragraphs, disre- 
garding the breaks of chapter and verse. Although the 
new arrangement is a gain in getting the sense of a passage, 
it hinders quick reference to a desired clause or verse. 

1 The Baptist Convention at Saratoga, N. Y., 1883, agreed to adopt 
and circulate the Anglo-American revision with the American changes 
put into the text, along with the Bible Union Version. Some churches 
among the Baptists and Congregationalists use the Revised Version, 
and it is occasionally read from the pulpit in a few churches of other 
denominations. 

2 One of the most serious omissions, to the common reader, is the 
doxology to the Lord's Prayer, Matt. 6 : 13. Among other changes 
are : " Every Scripture given by inspiration is profitable," etc., 2 Tim. 
3: 16; "Ye search the Scriptures,'' John 5 : 39, and numerous texts 
in thePsalms and Prophets. 



KING JAMES VERSIONS. 11 

Marking the chapters and verses in the margin does not 
overcome this objection ; for the eye misses the familiar 
breaks in the text and does not readily catch the verse or 
clause desired. (3) The omission of chapter headings and 
running head-lines at the top of each page. To satisfy 
the ordinary reader, these must be inserted. He will not 
accept the excuse that their insertion might lead the trans- 
lator into "the province of the commentator.' ' The 
words added in the text (in italics) in the Revised and in 
previous Versions are often equivalent to a comment, and 
should be excluded by a strict application of that rule. 
The outlook for the new version to displace the old is not 
yet very promising. It has been sharply criticised by some 
able Biblical scholars in Great Britain and America. 

10. It must be remembered, however, that the present 
"Authorized Version' ' was also criticised and was from 
thirty to fifty years in coming into popular and universal 
use ; but it finally displaced the popular Genevan Version 
and the Bishops' Bible, which had been favored by royal 
and by ecclesiastical authority. 

11. American scholarship was tardily, though on the 
whole fairly, recognized in the work. Over 900 American 
suggestions in the New Testament were adopted by the 
British revisers. 1 

1 Among the more important American renderings which the Eng- 
lish revisers were unwilling to adopt were : (1) " demon " or " demons " 
for " devil" or " devils" in such phrases as "to cast out devils." The 
Bible speaks of many evil spirits, but of only one devil; (2) "who" 
or "that" in place of "which" when applied to persons, and to substi- 
tute modern forms of speech for such archaic forms as " wot," "wist," 
"hale;" (3) "hades" for "hell" when the Greek refers to the realm 
of the dead, using "hell" to apply only to the place of torment: a 
distinction the English revisers admitted in the book of Revelation ; 
(4) a more accurate designation of coins; (5) omit the title "Saint" 
and "Apostle " in the headings to New Testament books. See " Ap- 



12 THE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND 

12. Conservative Plan. — The principles guiding the re- 
visers were very conservative. They were to make " as 
few alterations as possible/ ' as already stated. About 
36,000 were made in the New Testament, but proportion- 
ately fewer in the Old Testament. They were to limit the 
"expression of such alterations to the language of the au- 
thorized or earlier versions/ ' About 6,000 changes were 
made in the Greek text of the New Testament ; but com- 
paratively few changes in the Hebrew and Chaldaic text 
of the Old Testament. 1 The original text followed (He- 
brew and Greek) was to "be that for which the evidence is 
decidedly preponderating.' ■ No radical changes could be 
made under the rules adopted, nor could an essentially new 
translation be introduced under cover of revision. Even 
those who criticise the infelicitous English it occasionally 
uses, admit that the renderings generally represent the 
original more accurately than previous English versions. 
If this proves to be true, the Revision can afford to wait ; 
truth is stronger than prejudice and error, and will finally 
prevail. Let us now consider the translation upon which 
the Revised Version was based. 

13. The King James or "Authorized Version." This 
version of the Bible was proposed by Dr. Reynolds, 2 of 



pendix" to Revised Testament, and Companion to Revised Version 
by A. Roberts, Am. ed., pp. 177 ff. Also Companion by SchafF. 

1 Of the nearly 6,000 changes made in the Greek New Testament 
text, and over 36,000 changes in the English New Testament of 
the Authorized Version, the great majority are of trivial or minor im- 
portance, and would not be noticed by the common reader. 

Of the 179,914 words in the Revised New Testament 154,526 are 
retained from the " Authorized Version." See R. Wendell, Revised 
New Testament. 

2 Dr. Reynolds was a Puritan and President of Corpus Christi Col- 
lege, Oxford. He was stoutly opposed by Bishop Bancroft, but James 
I. was vain, and aped Solomon for wisdom. 



KING JAMES VERSIONS. 13 

Oxford, and ordered by James L, in 1604. The king ap- 
pointed fifty-four translators (probably suggested by the 
universities) ; but the work was delayed for three years, 
and the list we have gives only forty-seven scholars cer- 
tainly known to have entered upon the work. They were 
divided into six companies. Each company was assigned 
a portion of the Bible (including the Apocrypha) to trans- 
late; two companies meeting at Westminster, two at Ox- 
ford and two at Cambridge. 1 

14. Principle of the Version of 161 1. — This translation 
was to conform to the Hebrew and Greek texts; but the 
then current Bishops' Version "was to be as little altered 
as the truth of the original will admit.' ' The older versions, 
as Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Whitchurch's and the Genevan, 
might also be used when they agreed " better with the text 
than the Bishops' Bible." 

15. King James* Version a Revision. — In fact, therefore, 
the King James Version was a revision, rather than an en- 
tirely new translation. This is also implied by the title-page 
in our common Bibles. * When the scholars appointed by 
King James had completed their revision 01 translation, six 
of their number (some say twelve) met to review the work and 
correct the printer's proofs. It was issued in a black-letter 
folio volume by R. Barker, with a fulsome dedication to 

1 The first company at Westminster had the books of the Old Testa- 
ment to 2 Kings ; the second company had the Epistles of the New 
Testament. The first company at Oxford had the prophetical books 
from Isaiah to Malachi ; the second had the four Gospels, Acts and 
Revelation. The first company at Cambridge had the other Old Testa- 
ment books, and the second had the Old Testament Apochryphal 
books. 

2 " The Holy Bible, translated out of the original tongues ; and 
with the former translations diligently compared and revised." Some 
English Bibles add, "By his majesty's special command." "Appointed 
to be read in churches." 



14 THE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND 

the king and a pedantic preface written by Dr. Miles 
Smith, giving the reasons for the work and the principles 
guiding those who did it. 

1 6. Why called li Authorized Version." — The King 
James Version is popularly, though not accurately, called 
the "Authorized Version." On the title-page as now 
printed in England is a notice, "Appointed to be read in 
churches/ ' But this was not on the first edition of the 
New Testament of 1611, nor on several editions of the 
Bible issued in the first five years after the issue of the 
King James Version. The most diligent search of officials 
and scholars has failed to find any evidence that the version 
was ever publicly sanctioned in 161 1 by convocation, privy 
council, parliament or by the king. It gained the title 
possibly because the work was ordered by the king. The 
version (for it was not a new translation) gradually dis- 
placed the existing versions (the Bishops' and the Genevan), 
and won its way to popular acceptance by its superior 
merits. But the contest was a long one. The King James 
Version was attacked for lack of fidelity to the Hebrew and 
Greek text. Romanists likewise accused it of misrepre- 
senting Scripture to favor Protestantism. Arminians 
charged it with a Calvinistic bias, Puritans with a leaning 
to the Church of England, and others with favoring mo- 
narchical notions. (See 1 Pet. 2:13.) 

17. For more than twenty years after the issue of the 
King James Version the Genevan Version was widely, if 
not generally, used in private and public worship. Though 
no edition of the Bishops' Bible was issued after 1608, the 
New Testament of the Bishops' Version appeared in at least 
five editions from 1608 to 1618. Editions of the Genevan 
Version of the New Testament and of the Bible continued 



KING JAMES VERSIONS. 17 

to be issued freely up to 1644. Texts for sermons were 
chosen from the Genevan or other versions than the so- 
called Authorized Version, even by bishops and those high 
in authority, for many years after 161 1. Even as late as 
1653 parliament considered a bill for the appointment of a 
committee to revise the King James Version. This project 
failed, as parliament soon after dissolved. The house of 
Stuarts was restored to the rule of England, and the version 
of 161 1 was left to win its way over all previous versions 
and to remain the popular English version since that period. 
18. Changes in the Version of 161 1. — Comparing a com- 
mon English Bible of now with a copy of the first issue of 
161 1, marked differences are at once seen. Not only is a 
difference seen in the forms of the letters and in the spell- 
ing of many words, but in the readings of numerous pas- 
sages. 1 After the folio edition of 161 1, the King James 
Version appeared in an octavo form in 161 2, and in an 
edition omitting the apocryphal books in 1629. The errors 
of the earlier issues were corrected in editions of 161 6, but 
especially of 1629 and 1638. 2 Bishop Lloyd's edition, of 
London 1701, was the first that gave chronological dates 
in the margin, based chiefly upon the chronology of Ussher. 



1 For instances of this, see Scrivener's Preface to the Cambridge 
Paragraph Bible. Even the folio edition of 1 613 differs from that of 
161 1 in over four hundred places. 

2 The errors of some editions gave them celebrity, as the " Vinegar 
Bible" (a splendid and costly one), Oxford, 1717, so called from a 
misprint of vinegar for vineyard in heading of Luke 20. The 
"Wicked Bible" (8vo. 1631) was so called from the omission of 
" not " in the seventh commandment, and Laud fined the king's 
printers ^300 for their carelessness in printing it. A copy of the 
" Wicked Bible " is in the Lenox Library, New York. There is a 
German Bible, 1731, with a similar blunder. The " Breeches Bible" 
was so called from the reading of a Genevan edition, " made them- 
selves breeches," Gen. 3:7. 



18 THE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND KING JAMES VERSIONS. 

Additional marginal references were inserted by Dr. Paris 
in 1762, and by Dr. Blayney in 1769. 

19. No Standard Edition of the King James Version. — 
The Committee on Versions (1851-56) of the American 
Bible Society found twenty-four thousand variations in 
six different editions of the Authorized Version, and recom- 
mended improvements, which were adopted, including re- 
visions of the chapter headings. So great was the popular 
opposition to these changes, that the society was compelled 
to discontinue issuing the amended edition and return to 
the old issues, with all their variations and imperfections. 
This, however, shows how strong a hold the Bible has upon 
the popular heart. We have therefore no standard edition 
of the "Authorized Version " of the English Bible. The 
King James Version of the English Bible belongs to the 
golden age of English literature, the age of Shakespeare 
and Milton and the greatest of English classics. It pos- 
sesses the strength of the Saxon, the grace of the Norman 
French, and the dignity of the Latin, harmoniously mingled 
into vigorous and perspicuous English. 



CHAPTER II. 

EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 

i. The Common Version a Growth. — Our common Eng- 
lish Bible, the King James or so-called "Authorized Ver- 
sion/ ' is the outgrowth of many preceding versions, and 
the fruit of more than two centuries of labor by many 
eminent Biblical scholars. 

2. The Douai Version. — The great eagerness of the 
people for the Bible in their own tongue compelled the 
Romanists to issue a version, as they state, " specially for 
the discovery of the corruptions of divers late translations 
and for clearing the controversies in religion of these 
days." 1 The New Testament was published at Rheims, 
1582. The Old Testament was translated about the same 
time, but was not published until 1609-10 at Douai or 
Douay, and the Douai Bible complete at Rouen, 1633-35. 
The work is believed to owe its origin to William Allen, 
one of the founders of the college at Douai. The transla- 
tion is from the Latin Vulgate, and was made by Gregory 
Martin and three or four other English scholars. Modern 
editions of the Douai Version differ widely from the orig- 
inal version. Cardinal Wiseman says, " To call the Roman 
Catholic version now in use the version of Rheims and 
Douai is an abuse of terms. It has been altered and mod- 

1 From title-page, Rhemish New Testament, 1582. 
2 (19) 



20 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 

ified till scarcely any verse remains as it was originally 
published.' ' * The Roman Church has never been friendly 
to vernacular translations of the Bible, and hence the Douai 
Version has had a comparatively small circulation. Though 
it may have contributed some minor improvements to the 
King James Version, it is not in the line of succession of 
that version. The next link immediately back of the King 
James Version is the Bishops' Bible. 

3. The Bishops' Bible was prepared by Matthew Parker, 
Archbishop of Canterbury, and ten or fifteen men of learn- 
ing, most of whom were bishops ; hence its title Bishops' 
Bible. It was completed, and a copy presented to Queen 
Elizabeth, in 1568. Parker issued a revised edition in 
1572. This version is also sometimes called Parker's Bible. 

4. Why Made, — The Genevan Version (see p. 21) with 
brief explanatory notes had become the Bible of the com- 
mon people, having displaced the Great Bible of Cranmer, 
used by the clergy and in the church services. As the Great 
Bible was not as accurate a translation as the Genevan, and 
could not regain its former popularity, a new version was 
attempted which would be more acceptable to royalists 
than the Calvin istic and republican ideas reflected in some 
of the comments of the version by the Puritan reformers 
of Geneva. 

5. The Bishops' Bible was completed in about three 
years. The rules laid down by Parker were conservative 
and simple : (1) To follow the common English translation 
used in the churches, except where it varied from the orig- 
inal ; (2) to use chapter and verse divisions as in Pagninus 
and Munster; (3) to make no "bitter notes;" (4) to 
change indelicate words to "more convenient terms." It 

1 Wiseman's Essays, vol. i. pp. 73-75. 



EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 21 

contained marginal notes, references and brief comments 
explanatory of the text. 1 

6. Several editions of the Bishops' Bible were issued ; 
the last in 1608. In 1571 Convocation ordered that every 
archbishop and bishop should have a copy of this version, 
" of the largest volume," placed in his hall or dining-room 
for the use of servants or strangers, and also a copy in 
every cathedral, and if possible in every church. This was 
clearly at that time the so-called "Authorized Version." 
It supplanted the Great Bible, but the Genevan held its 
place with the people. 

7. The Genevan Version was made by English reform- 
ers who found a refuge in Geneva from the persecution of 
Queen Mary, and was published in 1560. 

8. Genevan New Testament, 1557. — Three years earlier 
a translation of the New Testament into English was made 
at Geneva by William Whittingham (aided perhaps by 
others), who had married Calvin's sister. 

9. The Genevan Bible was a distinct work, begun in 
1558 and completed in 1560. The translation was the 
joint work of a company of learned men, among whom 
were Coverdale, Knox, Whittingham, Goodman and Cole. 
But the translation of the New Testament in the Genevan 
Bible was a careful revision of the Genevan New Testament 

of 1557- 

10. Popular Merits of the Genevan Bible, — (1) The 
translation was from the best original texts then known. 
(2) Its form was a neat quarto instead of the clumsy folio. 

1 Some of the comments are curious : Rom. 1 1 : 8 reads, " the spirit 
of remorse ;" the comment is, " pricking and unquietness of conscience. " 
Isa. 66 : 3 reads, " he that killeth a sheep for me knetcheth a dog ; " the 
note explains, "that is, cutteth off a dog's neck;" a much-needed 
note ! 



22 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 

(3) Explanatory notes on hard texts (Swiss in doctrine and 
politics) were given in the margin. (4) The type was clear 
Roman in place of the unsightly black letter formerly 
used. (5) The text was broken into chapters and verses 
after Stephens' Greek Testament (1551) and Pagninus* 
Latin (1528), but adding numerals at the beginning of 
each verse. (6) Chapter headings, references and (in 
Henry's edition, 1578) a Bible dictionary of value. 

11. A careful revision was made by L. Tomson, in 1576, 
and the Genevan was the first Bible printed in Scotland, 
1579. It was the first complete English translation of the 
Bible direct from the Hebrew and Greek} The comments 
were lucid, vigorous, sometimes dogmatic, but generally 
practical. It quickly gained a wide popularity. At the 
accession of the Roman Catholic Mary, the public use of 
the English Bible was forbidden in churches ; all copies 
that couid be found were burnt (with an army of martyrs), 
and not a single Bible was printed in England during her 
five years' rule. When Elizabeth became queen in 1558, 
the Bible was again freely read. Not less than 130 editions 
of the Genevan Bible were printed, over 90 of them before 
161 1. It retained its popularity for a generation after the 
King James Version appeared. 2 

12. The Great Bible (1539) was edited by Miles Cover- 
dale under direction of Thomas Crumwell. Paris was 



1 The Old Testament shows that Coverdale's Great Bible was care- 
fully consulted, and the New Testament that Tyndale's Version was 
followed. It is nicknamed the " Breeches Bible," from its rendering 
" made themselves breeches," Gen. 3:7. 

2 Yet the King James editions of 1612-13 had a title-page the fac- 
simile of the Genevan (heart-shaped oval with twelve tribes and twelve 
apostles in margin), and other editions copied the form and style of the 
Bishops' Bible in order to supplant more easily these popular versions. 
Eadie, Hist,, vol. ii. p. 291. 




FAC-SIMILE (REDUCED) OF TITLE PAGE OF THE GEEAT BIBLE. 



EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 25 

famous for the excellence of its paper and type. Cover- 
dale went thither to have it printed. But the work was in- 
terrupted by order of the Inquisition and many sheets 
seized. Most of these were recovered, and, with types, 
presses and men, brought to England, where the work was 
issued in 1539. It has an elaborately engraved title-page 
designed by Hans Holbein, the most famous wood-en- 
graver of his day. 1 From its large size, 14 x 9 inches, this 
work was called The Great Bible. A second edition in 
1540 had a preface by Cranmer, from which it has been in- 
accurately called Cranmer 1 s Bible. It is likewise called 
WhitechurcK s or Whitchurch' s Bible, after the name of the 
printer. The version is mainly a careful revision of Cover- 
dale' f s Bible of 1535, and is of special interest because the 
Psalter and the Scripture selections in the communion ser- 
vice of the English Church Prayer-book are from the Great 
Bible. It remained the "Authorized Version " for twenty- 
eight years ; indeed, strictly it is the only "Authorized 
Version/ ' for neither the Bishops' nor the King James Ver- 
sion ever had formal royal approbation or authority. 2 

13. Coverdale's Bible, 1535, which the Great Bible 
closely resembled, was based largely upon the Latin Vul- 
gate and German Versions, as the title to his New Testa- 
ment honestly states. 3 The German versions used were 
doubtless Luther's and the Zurich ; Pagninus and the Latin 
Vulgate, and Tyndale, probably make up the "five inter- 
preters" Coverdale says he followed. The chief merit of 



1 A fac- simile of the title-page is given from Moulton's History of 
the English Bible. 

2 See Eadie, Hist. Eng. Bible, vol. i. p. 383. 

3 " Biblia— the Bible : that is the Holy Scripture of the Olde and 
Newe Testament faithfully and truly translated out of Douche and 
Latyn in to Englishe MDXXXV." 



26 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 

his version is its pure, strong English idiom, sometimes 
quaint withal, but generally musical. Some of the most 
rhythmical and familiar passages in the Psalms come to us 
from Coverdale's Version. He also edited a New Testa- 
ment, 1538, with the Latin and English side by side. 

14. Matthew 1 s Bible, 1537, which was issued soon after 
Coverdale's, and before the Great Bible, was the reputed 
work of Thomas Matthew. But this was clearly an as- 
sumed name, and it is almost certain that the real author 
was John Rogers the martyr. Rogers was a friend of Tyn- 
dale, and the translation is substantially the version of 
Tyndale except from Ezra to Malachi, which is almost 
identical with Coverdale's, 1535. 

15. Taverner's Bible, 1539, * s a comparatively unimpor- 
tant revision of Matthew's Bible, the chief difference in 
the Old Testament consisting in the omission or abridg- 
ment of the notes. In the New Testament changes were 
made in the text also, some of them valuable ; but his ver- 
sion is of unequal merit. As a scholar Richard Taverner 
was capricious. 

16. Tyndale's New Testament Version, 1526. — When 
a learned papist declared with some zeal to William Tyn- 
dale, "We were better be without God's law than the 
pope's," Tyndale replied, "If God spare my life, ere 
many years I will cause a ploughboy to know more of the 
Scripture than thou doest." Though he died a martyr, 
1536, he was able to fulfill his declaration. But he was 
compelled to leave England in 1524 and completed his 
translation in exile. 

17. Tyndale 1 s New Testament, 1526, was the first Eng- 
lish version made directly from the Greek, (since Wyc- 
liffe's version was from the Latin Vulgate), and the first 



3 



ffrtK,^ 




■g s * *t? 5^ •-?* 






r* f> ^-* v ^ •* w ci o ^* \jv^ff »— i ^, v fT 

H&o «> ^-^ . e* ^ S ? s- S. ^> 

*"— ^-« Q o- f^ *«rf ° :r o v •• r . 

2^ 



o*.~ - ^ 



3 § 5 * 



^» <JI "fir* p*. 

!2 %? 



£* ^ O^ «-* »i 3 O *^ *"* <-f q 5£« ""^ 
^5*^*^ «> ,o— c* si: r-r* k 2 ft P 









EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 29 

English New Testament printed. 1 It was issued at Worms 
in two editions, a quarto and an octavo ; 3000 copies of 
each were printed and sent to England in the spring of 
1526. The title-page has an illuminated border showing 
figures of the four Evangelists and the Apostles Peter, 
Paul, James and Jude ; but it gives no clue to editor, 
printer, place or date of publication. 

18. Its Chief Features. — The version is vigorous, clear 
and simple enough in style for the " ploughboy " to under- 
stand. The text is arranged in paragraphs, with chapter 
divisions but no verses. It omits the doxology to the 
Lord's Prayer. Tyndale also translated various portions 
of the Old Testament, including all of the Pentateuch, 
which were published after his death. Tyndale's work 
was revised and incorporated into Matthew } s Bible, 1537, 
as already stated. 

19. Our Common Version is more deeply indebted for 
its felicities of language to Tyndale's than to any other 
version. " Our English Testament," says Ellicott, " after 
all its changes, revisions and remodellings, is still truly 
and substantially the venerable version of Tyndale the 
martyr." 2 " The peculiar genius," says Froude, " which 
breathes through it [our English Bible], the mingled ten- 
derness and majesty — the Saxon simplicity — the preternat- 
ural grandeur — unequalled, unapproached in the attempted 
improvements of modern scholars, all are here, and bear 
the impress of the mind of one man — William Tyndale." 3 

20. Wycliffe's Version, 1382, was the first complete 

1 The only portion of the Scriptures printed in English before this 
was a portion of the Psalms, in 1505. 

2 On Revision, p. 85. 

8 Hist. Eng., vol. iii. p. 84. 



30 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 

translation of the Bible into English. 1 But it was made 
from the Latin Vulgate, and as it was before the invention 
of the art of printing, it was a manuscript or written Bible. 
This translation of the New Testament was completed in 
1380, and was entirely by John de WyclifTe or Wiclif. 2 
The Old Testament was finished about 1382, Nich- 
olas de Hereford aiding Wycliffe in this portion of the 
work. 

21. A careful revision, called Purveys Version, has sev- 
eral important changes, and as a marked feature, short 
comments in the margin. These versions are anonymous. 
A translator of the Bible was exposed to peril, making con- 
cealment necessary. But the versions were not hid. They 
were eagerly sought and read. Copies were made and 
passed into the hands of all classes of people. The king 
and the princes had them. Nearly 170 manuscript copies 
of Purvey' s Version made before 1430 have been preserved 
and examined, although a strict inquisition in that age 
searched for and burned all the writings of WyclirTe and 
his followers which could be found. Of the character of 
this first English Bible it must be said that it was baldly 

1 Metrical versions and paraphrases of portions of the Bible were 
made in English earlier than WyclirTe, and two prose versions of the 
Psalms, one by William of Shoreham, 1327, and the other soon after 
by Richard Rolle. Foxe, Johnson, Newcomeand others, including Sir 
Thomas More, have asserted that Bede translated the Scriptures com- 
plete into the vernacular ; but their assertion is not supported by his- 
tory. More appears to have referred to portions of the Bible rendered 
into Anglo-Saxon, and the statements of others rest upon mistaken in- 
formation. See George P. Marsh, Lects. Eng. Lang. ; Preface to 
Wyckliffe by Forshall and Madden. 

2 His name was spelled about thirty different ways, giving an excel- 
lent illustration of the unsettled condition of the English tongue at 
that period. 

A copy of the Bible in 1429 cost from £2 to £3, and for a few 
leaves poor persons gladly gave a load of hay. 



► 



o 



O 

CD 



s 

o 

























^^§ saS 




5 p -* ^ 



^ 









cr 

N3 




EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 



33 



w o 

* * ture. 

W 



literal. Yet, thrown into modern 
forms of spelling, the version has 
£ . many words and phrases that were 
M o retained in later translations. It 
g w was the language of the people, and 
« fed their hungry souls with the bread 
3 1 from God. 

S-^ 22. Anglo-Saxon Versions. — Most 
u g of the translations of portions of the 
jjS 1 Bible, earlier than Wycliffe' s, were 
mere paraphrases, sometimes failing 
to give the correct sense of Scrip- 
Such a paraphrase of the 
Gospels and the Acts in English, 
^ Jf but written in the Saxon characters, 
| v was made in the latter half of the 
& ,£ twelfth century by Orme or Ormun, 
§£ and is called the •"Ormulum." 
S-2 Several interlinear versions (Vul- 
> i-i gate of Jerome and the Vernacular) 
o « were made in the tenth and eleventh 
^ S centuries, a part of one known as 
S^ the "Rushworth Gloss" being 
£ & now in the Bodleian library. These 
h.g interlinear versions were probably 
S made for the use of priests who 
I'w did not understand the Latin. 
^ ^ King Alfred made a translation of 
w the Ten Commandments, portions 
of the Gospels, and he projected a 
translation of the Psalter, but his 
(ieath prevented its completion. The Venerable Bede 



34 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 

(672-755) completed a translation of the Gospel of John 
into the vernacular and wrote commentaries on most of 
the books of the Bible. His Church History was among 
the first books printed in Germany (1474). The earliest 
Anglo-Saxon paraphrases of portions of the Bible were in 
verse, by Guthloe, Aldhelm, and the most noted one by 
Caedmon, about 680. The Christian Scriptures were re- 
puted to have been introduced into England by the 
Monk Augustin, about 596, who used copies of the Old 
Latin Version, from which the earlier Anglo-Saxon trans- 
lations were made. 

23. Language of English Bible. — (1) In many paragraphs 
of the common English Version 39 words in 40 are of 
Anglo-Saxon derivation. 

(2) In the story of Joseph (Gen. 42 : 21-29), there are 
only 7 words beside proper names which are not Anglo- 
Saxon. 

(3) In the parable of the Sower (Matt. 13, etc.), of 106 
different words, only 3 are not Anglo-Saxon. 

(4) The Lord's Prayer (Matt. 6 : 9-13) has 65 words 
(" forever " one word), 59 are of Anglo-Saxon and 6 are 
of Latin derivation. 

(5) In John 11 : 32-36, 70 words in 72 are of Anglo- 
Saxon origin. In Milton's " Paradise Lost," Book IV: 
639, etc., of 90 words only 74 are Anglo-Saxon. In the 
famous passage of Shakespeare, " To be or not to be," of 
81 words 13 are not Anglo-Saxon. This shows the great 
comparative strength of the English Bible in words of 
Anglo-Saxon origin. 

24. Leading Facts about English Bibles. 

(1) First complete Bible in English (by ' WyclifFe)^^ 
the Latin, 1382. 



EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS. 35 

(2) First complete New Testament in English (by Tyn- 
dale) fro?n the Greek, 1526. 

(3) First printed English Bible, complete (Coverdale's), 

*535- 

(4) First English Testament divided into verses (Gene- 
van), 1557. 

(5) First English Bible divided into verses (Genevan), 
1560. 

(6) First English Bible, translated complete from the 
original languages, Greek and Hebrew (the Genevan Ver- 
sion), 1560. 

(7) Cost of early English Bibles : two arches of the Lon- 
don bridge, built in the thirteenth century, are reported to 
have cost ^25 ; a written copy of the Bible cost ^30. A 
laborer's wages was \\d. a day and board ; hence the cost 
of a Bible would be equal to a laborer's wages for about 
fifteen years. It was perilous for common people to read 
or to own a Bible. For example, in 1429, Marjery Back- 
ster was indicted for asking her maid to hear her husband 
read the Bible by night. In 1514-1519, John Stevenson 
was arrested for teaching the Ten Commandments, and 
Thomas Collins had his father arrested for the same offence. 
Robert Pope informed against his wife, son and father for 
hearing the Gospel of Matthew read to them. 



CHAPTER III. 

MODERN VERSIONS OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 

i. Next to a knowledge of our own versions, all English- 
speaking peoples should gain some knowledge of the Ger- 
man versions of the Bible. While the Common Version 
of the English Bible is the growth of centuries, the mature 
fruit of successive generations of Biblical scholars from 
Wyckliife to the King James revisers, the German version 
bears largely the impress of one mind and one genius — Mar- 
tin Luther. There were earlier versions in German, but the 
great version, the one version and the only popular one 
that is truly German, is that made by the great reformer. 

2. Earlier German Versions. — Passing the Gothic ver- 
sion of the fourth century, there was a translation of the 
Bible made in the fourteenth century, by some unknown 
scholars, 1 from the Latin Vulgate. No less than seventeen 
editions of it were printed between 1462 and 1522 — four- 
teen of them in High German and three or four in Low 
German dialect. Most of these were issued of folio size, 
in two volumes, with wood engravings. The Archbishop 
of Mainz in i486 forbade the printing of sacred and 
learned books, especially the German Bible, on the ground 
that the German language was incapable of correctly rep- 



1 Some have ascribed the earlier German version to the Waldenses 
(Keller, Haupt), but it may have sprung from a love of the word 
within the Romish Church (Jostes, Schaff and others). In the Munich 
Library are twenty-one written copies of the Gospels and Epistles in 
early German versions. 

(36) 



MODERN VERSIONS OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 37 

resenting religious ideas and the profound sense of Greek 
and Latin works ! 

3. Luther's Version. — While Luther was held a willing 
prisoner in Wartburg Castle, he translated the New Testa- 
ment into German, and it was published in 1522. Its title 
was "Das Newe Testament Deutzsch. Wittemberg." It 
was illustrated with wood engravings by the famous Lucas 
Cranach, having one illustration at the beginning of each 
book and twenty-one in the book of Revelation. It was 
divided into chapters like the Latin Bible, and into para- 
graphs, but not into verses. The Pentateuch appeared in 
1523, the Psalms in 1524, and the entire Bible (including 
the Apocrypha) in 1534. In translating the Old Testament, 
Luther formed a committee (Bible club) of his colleagues, 
Melanchthon, Justus Jonas and four others, who aided him 
in the work. Luther continued to amend and improve the 
version, issuing five successive revisions of it, the last in 
1545. He retained a Latin form of title, Biblia, and the 
translation was issued in folio, with numerous engravings. 

4. Merits of Luther's Version. — The German Bible was 
received with great enthusiasm. A hundred thousand 
copies — an enormous number for that age — were sold be- 
tween 1534 and 1574. 1 If his version did not form, it 
may be said to have reformed, unified and crystallized the 
German language. It gave it wings, and made it intelli- 
gible to the common people in all parts of Germany. It 
is the first great German classic. It brought one language 
out of many dialects — the language afterward of the golden 
era of German literature, the speech of Lessing, Herder, 
Goethe and Schiller. 2 

1 See Schaff, Hist. Christ. Ch., vol. vi. p. 350. 

2 Heinrich Heine, the poet, critic and German Voltaire, says of 



38 MODERN VERSIONS OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 

5. The original text of the New Testament, upon which 
Luther based his version, was the Greek text edited by 
Erasmus, 15 19. The Old Testament was translated from 
the Massoretic Hebrew text, edited by G. Ben Moseh, 
1494 ; but the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate were often 
consulted, and in the Apocrypha the latter was chiefly used 
as a basis. 1 

6. Revisions of Luther's Version. — Besides Luther's own 
revisions of his version, there have been many others, the 
most important being an official revision ordered by the 
Eisenach German Evangelical Conference of 1863. This 
was completed and published at Halle in 1883, and is 
known as the ProbebibeL The revision was made by a 
company of eminent Biblical scholars (eleven on the New 
Testament and twenty on the Old Testament), among 
whom were Tholuck, Riehm, Schlottmann, Dillmann, 
Delitzsch, Meyer, Dorner and Kostlin. The revision was 
extremely conservative, but was so sharply criticised that 
the Eisenach Conference of 1886 recommitted it for final 
action. While German scholars are bold and independent 
in theology, they are conservative and timid in questions 
of translation affecting the laity. 

7. The Roman Catholics, though stoutly opposed to giv- 
ing the people the Bible in the vernacular, were compelled 



Luther, " He created the German language. He did this by his trans- 
lation of the Bible." — Hist, of Religion and Poetry in Germany, Lon- 
don, vol. i. pp. 425, 427. 

1 Luther omitted the famous text respecting the three heavenly wit- 
nesses, I John 5:7, which appears first in the Frankfort edition of 
Luther's version (from Erasmus' Greek text of 1522), and is retained 
in the revised version of Luther, 1883, but is placed in brackets. The 
most popular text of Luther's Bible is that by the Canstein Bible 
Society. 



MODERN VERSIONS OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 39 

by Luther's work to issue rival versions in self-defence. 1 
The chief German versions by Romanists were by Emser, 
1527, Dietenberger, 1534, and Eck, 1537. They are all 
from the Vulgate, and generally clumsy and stiff, lacking 
the purity of German idiom which is found in Luther's 
version. Dietenberger' s revision has been revised by Ulen- 
berg, 1630, and re-revised by theologians of Mainz, 1662, 
and since been issued as the Catholic Bible used in Ger- 
many and by German Catholics. Among German versions 
or translations of the Bible made for scholars, that by De 
Wette, 1809, 4th ed. 1858, and that of Weizsacker, Tubin- 
gen, 1875, are the best. 

8. Dutch Versions. — The first complete translation of the 
Bible into Dutch was made by Jacob Van Liesveldt, and 
issued in two volumes folio, Antwerp, 1526. The second 
edition cost the printer his head. The version was par- 
tially supplanted by Utenhove's version in 1556. These 
versions were not in the best idiomatic Dutch. The first 
was based on Luther's version and the Cologne Bible ; the 
second upon Luther's German and Olivetan's French 
version. 

9. A new version was ordered by the Dutch synod in 
15 7 1 ; but owing to troubles and divisions in affairs, and to 
the deaths of scholars, the work was twice interrupted and 
long delayed. It was again ordered by the famous Synod 
of Dort, 1618, which appointed three translators and four- 
teen revisers ; but the new order was not approved by the 
States General until 1624, and the work was begun in 1626 
and was carried on at Leyden for eleven years. The new 

1 Emser charged Luther with a thousand grammatical and heretical 
errors, four being in the Lord's Prayer; among them, that he added 
the doxology, which is not in the Latin Vulgate. 



40 MODERN VERSIONS OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 

translation finally appeared in two editions — one with and 
one without marginal readings and references — in 1637. 
It is called the States 1 Bible ; and so superior was its merit 
that within fifteen years it gained unanimous popular favor 
and ecclesiastical approval. It is remarkable for its felicity 
of expression, and scholars regard it as one of the best of 
existing versions. 

10. The General Synod appointed a committee of four- 
teen, in 1854, to revise the old translation, in view of the 
progress in Biblical criticism. The New Testament re- 
vision was completed and issued in 1867, but its reception 
was not hearty ; indeed it was so adverse that the Old Tes- 
tament part was indefinitely postponed. 

11. French Versions. — Pierre, about 11 70, made a Bible 
History in French, and Gruars, in 1286-89, prepared a 
similar French Bible History. The first complete French 
version of the Bible was by Jean de Rely, a Roman Catho- 
lic, in 1487, based on the Vulgate and former partial ver- 
sions. There were twelve editions of this version issued. 
Another version was made by Lefevre d'Etaples, and 
issued in Antwerp, 1530. Pierre Robert Olivetan with the 
aid of that version made another, corrected by Calvin, 
issued at the expense of the Waldenses in 1535, which is 
known as the first Protestant version. The evangelical 
pastors of Geneva appointed a company from their own 
number (among them Beza) to issue a new version, which 
was completed in 1588. This version was revised by Mar- 
tin, Amsterdam, 1707, and by Ostervald, 1724. 

12. Louis Segond issued a new version, Geneva, 1874, 
third ed. 1879, being a direct translation from Hebrew and 
Greek into French. This version is printed by the Oxford 
press (fifty thousand copies first edition), with prose text in 



MODERN VERSIONS OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 41 

paragraphs and the poetry in verse form, the verses being 
noted in the margin. It also has brief notes and prefaces 
to the books, and is regarded as a decided improvement 
upon all previous French versions. The British and For- 
eign Bible Society, however, circulates the older versions 
by Martin and Ostervald, revised by the Bible Society of 
France. 

13. Italian Versions. — There were several translations of 
the Bible into Italian before the Reformation, the more im- 
portant being that of Nicolo, Venice, 1 471, and of Bruc- 
cioli from the original texts — New Testament, 1530, the 
entire Bible, Venice, 1532. The latter translator was in- 
dignant at the prohibition of the spread of the Bible 
among the people in the vernacular, but his version was put 
first in a Roman Catholic list of prohibited books. 

14. The first Protestant version of the Bible complete in 
Italian appeared in Geneva, 1562, but was displaced by 
that of Deodati, made from the original texts, Geneva, 
1607, in the Lucchese dialect and suited for the peasants. 
Another version by Martini, Roman Catholic Archbishop 
of Florence, made from a version of the Latin, was is- 
sued at Turin, 1776, and is circulated by the British and 
Foreign Bible Society (New Testament, ed. 181 3, the Bible, 
ed. 1 821), along with the versions of Deodati and others. 

15. Spanish Versions. — The earliest known translation of 
the New Testament into Spanish is that of Francisco, issued 
at Antwerp, 1543, and by Juan Perez, Venice, 1556. The 
whole Bible was translated by Cassidoro Regno and pub- 
lished at Basel, 1569 ; w r as revised by Valera and issued at 
Amsterdam, 1602. Another version was made by San 
Miguel and published at Madrid, in 1794. This was in 
nineteen volumes, and had the Latin and Spanish texts and 

3 



42 MODERN VERSIONS OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 

a commentary by the translator. The British and Foreign 
Bible Society has distributed Valera's and San Miguel's 
versions (the text only) since 1828 until the present (1891). 

16. Danish Versions. — The first complete Danish version 
of the Bible was edited under the name of C. Pederson in 
1550, and has been often revised, a thorough revision being 
made in 18 15 to 1824, which is still circulated by the 
British and Foreign Bible Society along with a recent re- 
vision, and a special revision, known as the Norwegian 
Bible, made by the Norwegian Bible Society and a commit- 
tee of revision appointed in 1871. Until the division of 
the kingdoms, in 181 4, the Norwegians used the ordinary 
Danish version. 

17. A Swedish version was completed in 15 41 by Lau- 
rentius and Olaus Petri. This has been often revised and 
is still in use. 

iS. Besides the versions in the principal languages of 
Europe, there have been many versions and revisions made 
in other European languages and dialects, as the Welsh, 
Gaelic, Irish, Portuguese, Lap, Polish, Bohemian, Russ, 
Slavonic, Modern Greek and many others. Of these, and 
the two hundred to three hundred missionary translations, 
particular notice cannot here be given. 

19. The modern Arabic version begun by Eli Smith, 
1847, an d completed by his co-laborer, C. V. A. Van 
Dyck, 1866, is a monument of patient, persevering and 
profound scholarship. It is accounted one of the most 
faithful and finished of all modern missionary versions. 



CHAPTER IV. 

ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 

i. One book of religion — the Bible — has been valued 
and loved by the learned and unlearned, by priest and 
people, for more than eighteen centuries. No other 
sacred book has been so deeply or so widely endeared to 
the human heart. There is no other book with a history 
like that of the Bible. In the early centuries of Christian- 
ity, translations of the Bible into the vernacular or common 
speech of the peoples were made and circulated wherever 
the gospel gained a foothold among a nation or a people. 
Several of the more important of these translations, or por- 
tions of them, have been preserved to our times, and are 
of value in establishing the early and often the true reading 
of the original copy of the Christian Scriptures. Some of 
these versions will now be briefly described. 

2. The Armenian. — The gospel was introduced into Ar- 
menia from Cappadocia ; and the translations of the Bible 
into Armenian were probably made from Greek manuscripts 
obtained from some portion of Asia Minor. At first the 
Armenian disciples may have used Syriac copies of the 
Scriptures ; but early in the fourth century they had a writ- 
ten language, formed from an alphabet of thirty-six letters. 
The earliest version of the Scriptures in Armenian appears 
to have been made from the Peshito (Syriac). Later in 

(43) 



44 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 

that century (431 to 450) a new translation, direct from 
the Greek, was suggested by Miesrob and Moses Chorenen- 
sis, and was completed by two scholars, Joseph and Eznak, 
who went to Alexandria to perfect their knowledge of the 
Greek. The existing manuscripts of this version are not 
very ancient, but they contain the entire Bible. The best 
printed edition is by Zohrab, and is now issued by the 
British and Foreign Bible Society. 

3. The Gothic. — The Goths, in their old home about 
Mcesia, were early led to accept Christianity. Their sec- 
ond bishop, Ulphilas (Ulfilas or Wulfilas), 348 a. d., 
though an Arian, translated the Bible (except I., II. Sam. 
and I., II. Kings) from Greek into Gothic. The gospels are 
placed in the "western " order, that is, Matthew, John, 
Luke, Mark. Seven manuscripts containing portions of 
this version have been preserved ; but they are fragmentary, 
large gaps occurring and missing leaves in both the Old 
and New Testament portions. The best-printed editions 
are: A. Uppstrom, Upsala, 1854-1868, and E. Bernhardt, 
Halle, 1875, — tne latter being the Gothic and Greek, with 
critical notes. 

4. The Coptic or Egyptian Versions. — Little has been 
definitely known of these ancient Coptic translations until 
recently. Three are known in three different dialects: (1) 
The Memphitic or Bahiric dialect of lower Egypt. This 
translation belongs to the second century. There are in 
the various libraries of Europe twenty-eight manuscript 
copies of the Gospels in the Memphitic dialect, seventeen 
copies of the Pauline and catholic Epistles and the Acts 
(the Acts follow instead of precede the Epistles), and ten 
of the book of Revelation. This translation is regarded 
as of great importance, because it is believed to indicate 



ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 45 

the text current at Alexandria, free from many corruptions 
prevailing in the second century. (2) The Thebaic or Sa- 
hidic version, in the dialect of upper Egypt, also exists in 
manuscripts, but only in a very fragmentary form. 1 The 
best-printed edition of the Thebaic translation is by C. G. 
Woide, completed by Ford, Oxford, 1799. (3) The Bash- 
muric or Eleaarchian translation, probably belonging to 
the third century, of which only fragments of John's Gos- 
pel and of the Pauline Epistles have been found. This 
version is based upon the Thebaic, the Bashmuric being a 
modification of the Thebaic dialect, and the Bashmuric 
translation is chiefly useful in texts where the Thebaic is 
wanting. 

5. An Ethiopic version was early made for use in Abys- 
sinia, probably in the fourth century. The manuscript 
copies of this version are not very ancient ; but the Ethi- 
opic has now given place to a later dialect, the Amharic, 
into which the Bible has been translated. 

6. The Syriac Versions. — The Syriac or Aramaean be- 
longs to the Semitic family of languages, and is older than 
the patriarch Jacob. It is copious, flexible and dignified, 
and the Old and New Testaments were translated into that 
tongue and used in public worship from the second century 
downward. 



1 These ancient Coptic translations show that the books then in- 
cluded in the New Testament were the same as now, except the Apoc- 
alypse. The order, however, was different ; the four Gospels were 
first, but usually in this order — John, Matthew, Mark, Luke ; then 
came the Pauline Epistles, including that to the Hebrews, next the 
catholic or general epistles, and lastly Acts. In some of the manu- 
scripts the book of Revelation appears at the end ; but there are lec- 
tionaries or Scripture service lessons between the book of Acts and 
the book of Revelation. This would indicate that Revelation was not 
admitted to the New Testament in the opinion of those who made the 



46 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 

7. There are four versions in Syriac : — (1) The Feshito 
(P&shU f -to)y (or Peshitto, Pesehito, or Peshitta), meaning 
"simple" or faithful, so called from the character of the 
version. In its present form it belongs to the third or 
fourth century. It has been known to scholars for over 
three centuries. 1 (2) The Curetorian is a fragment of the 
Gospels, but now generally conceded to be the earliest of 
all versions in Syriac. It was found in a convent in the 
desert, seventy miles northwest of Cairo, in 1842, and 
published, with an English translation by Dr. Cureton, in 
1858, and with three added leaves (1871) by J. R. Crow- 
foot in Greek, London, 1870-72. (3) The Phiioxenian or 
Harklean was a Syriac version made in the fifth century by 
Xenias or Philoxenus, a heretical bishop of eastern Syria. 
It was carefully revised by Thomas of Harkel or Heraclea, 
616, who compared it with some ancient Greek copies. 
The best existing manuscript of this version is from Mardin, 
and belongs to the Protestant College at Beirut. (4) The 
Jerusalem Syriac is an evangelistary, or selections from the 
Gospels, found in five existing manuscripts in the Vatican 
at Rome. The version belongs to the fifth century. 

8. The Latin, — The ancient versions of the Bible in 
Latin may be classed in two groups:— (1) Old Latin; (2) 
The Vulgate, by Jerome, in its varied recensions. The 
Old Latin translation was known to the Latin fathers, as 
Tertullian, Cyprian, the two Hilarys, Ambrose, Jerome, 
Augustine, Pelagius and others. It dates back to the mid- 
translation, or else that it belonged to a second canon, as we know was 
the case for a time with some of the shorter epistles. 

1 The best printed edition in England is by the British and Foreign 
Bible Society, and by Bagster. A better American edition is by Dr. 
J. Perkins, Oroomiah, 1841, and New York, 1874; also a literal trans- 
lation from the Syriac Peshito, by Dr. Murdock, New York, 1857. 



ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 47 

die or latter half of the second century. It was made 
from the Septuagint, in the Old Testament, and is in the 
rough Latin of the second century, which lacks classic pol- 
ish, yet is not without vigor and terseness of expression. 

9. Fragments of the Old Latin translations are still 
extant, and indicate three variant types of the text — an 
African, a European, and one of the character which 
Augustine commends as the Itala. Whether all these forms 
are based upon one African translation or on different in- 
dependent translations is an unsettled question. This 
much seems to be generally agreed by the best critics, that 
the earliest form of the Old Latin version is of north Afri- 
can origin. From thirty to forty manuscripts of portions 
of the Old Latin version are known to be in existence. A 
carefully-edited and printed edition of these Old Latin 
versions, in a satisfactory form for general use among 
scholars, is a thing desired. 

10. The Vulgate. — Jerome, one of the most learned men of 
his time, urged by the Roman bishop Damasus, about 383 
a.d., undertook a thorough revision of the Old Latin ver- 
sions, that he might make a Vulgate (Vulgata) or Latin 
text of the Bible which would be universally accepted by 
Latin-speaking peoples. His work of revising the Old 
Latin versions led Jerome to undertake a new and more 
faithful translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew. 
He spent about twenty years (385 to 405) at Bethlehem, 
the town in which our Saviour was born, in these labors. 1 
Jerome's version was not at first regarded with favor; but 
after some years its superior merit brought it into general 

1 At Bethlehem, in the crypt under the Church of the Nativity, is a 
room called the " Chapel of St Jerome," in which this great man is 
said to have pursued his studies and work of translating the Bible. 



48 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 

use* For years it raised a howl of indignation. Jerome 
was irritated by the attacks of the ignorant priests, whom 
he calls bipedes asellos, " two-legged donkeys." Long after 
Jerome's death his version was accepted, and iooo years 
later was counted superior to the original text ! The Latin 
Bible which came thus into use as Jerome's version was in 
fact a composite work. The Old Testament, excepting the 
Psalms, was from his new translation made from the He- 
brew. The Psalms were his revision of the Old Latin, 
based not upon the original Hebrew but upon the Septua- 
gint. 1 The Apocrypha was also from the Old Latin trans- 
lation, excepting the two books of Judith and Tobit, which 
were from Jerome's new version. The New Testament 
books were revised from the Old Latin version. The text 
became so corrupt that Charlemagne about 802 directed 
Alcuin to collate the copies and revise the Latin text. 

11. The Council of Trent, 1546, decreed what books were 
to be received as canonical, and that the text of the 
Latin edition was authentic. But the question at once 
arose, Which Latin text, and which edition of it, is the 
authentic one? Pope Sixtus V. issued a revised edition of 
the Vulgate text in 1590, which he decreed to be the au- 
thoritative edition, and threatened excommunication against 
any who used any other. Sixtus died that year. So many 
errors, however, were pointed out in the Sixtine edition 
that Bellarmin proposed to issue a corrected edition in Six- 
tus' name, and this pious fraud was actually undertaken, 
and in the new edition all the principal blunders in the 



1 It was called the Roman Psalter, while Jerome's new translation 
was known as the Gallican Psalter, The former was retained in the 
Latin Bibles until Pius V., 1566, when it was displaced by the Gallican 
Psalter. 



ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 49 

former edition were charged to the printers ! Clement 
VIII. had the new edition of the Latin text prepared with 
greater care and issued in 1592, in the face of the threat- 
ened anathema of his predecessor, Sixtus V. 1 This Clem- 
entine text is the standard Roman Catholic Bible, taking 
precedence in that church of the Hebrew and Greek origi- 
nal texts in questions of doctrine and life. A critical edi- 
tion of Jerome's Latin version is wanting, though the 
materials for it are abundant. 

12. The Septuagint, or Greek version of the Old Testa- 
ment, was made by Hellenistic Jews of Alexandria, be- 
tween 285 and 247 B.C. According to Jewish tradition, it 
was made by seventy or seventy-two elders (hence its title ; 
Septuaginta, or seventy) sent from Jerusalem ; but great 
obscurity rests upon the real time and history of its origin. 2 
It is also very difficult now to ascertain precisely what was 
the reading of the original Septuagint, but it is assumed 
that the text we have is in the main that current in the days 
of our Lord. From this version Jesus quotes, and so do 
the apostles. It was the accepted Scriptures of the dis- 
persed Jews, and is the basis of the Greek used by early 
Christian writers. The Septuagint is in the main faithful to 
the Hebrew text, although it cannot be said to be minutely 
accurate, judged by the Hebrew now current, and some- 



1 These are known as the Sixtine or Clementine Latin texts. 

2 The importance of this translation is apparent not merely from its 
great antiquity, which, between conflicting Hebrew readings, indicates 
the one then current, but also from the fact that of 290 direct quota- 
tions from the Old Testament in the New, the great majority agree bet- 
ter with the Septuagint than with the Hebrew. More exactly, accord- 
ing to Turpie, 90 quotations agree with the Septuagint, of which 53 
also agree with the Hebrew ; 10 agree with the Hebrew but not with 
the Septuagint; 175 differ from both, but these generally are nearer to 
the Septuagint than to the Hebrew. 



50 ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 

times gives a paraphrase rather than a close translation: of 
the Hebrew text. It was freely used by the early Christian 
fathers. The current text of the Greek Scriptures had be- 
come corrupted from frequent copying during several 
centuries. In order to attain a better text, Origen (184- 
254) edited a tetrapla, or fourfold text, and later on his 
hexapla, or sixfold Bible text. In the first he arranged in 
parallel columns the Hebrew, the Septuagint and three 
other Greek versions made in the second century by Aquila, 
Symmachus and Theodotion. In the latter he added three 
anonymous Greek translations, numbered fifth, sixth and 
seventh, all in parallel columns in order to show the true 
reading and meaning of the Hebrew Scriptures. 1 

13. The Targums is the general term for the Chaldee or 
Aramaic versions and paraphrases of portions of the Old 
Testament. Eight are now extant, of which three are 
upon the Pentateuch, two on Esther, and others upon the 
prophets, poetical books and other portions of the Old 
Testament. These are generally very free translations, and 
often diffuse paraphrases. The so-called Targum #f Onke- 
los on the Pentateuch and of Jerushalmi in its first form 
are the most literal versions. These works were a growth 
from oral traditions and teachings, and of great interest to 
Old Testament students. The earliest historic instance of 
a targum is when Ezra read the law to the returned exiles, 
and the scribes were compelled to "give the sense and 



1 Aquila was a Jewish proselyte of Pontus, who made a Greek ver- 
sion of the Hebrew Scriptures, 1 17-138 A.D., to use in discussions with 
the Christians, because the Septuagint version was used against the 
Jews. Theodotion made a revision of the Greek version of the Old 
Testament about the same period as the work by Aquila, and his ver- 
sion is retained in Greek Bibles. The version by Symmachus, an 
Ebionite disciple, was made somewhat later. 






ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. 51 

cause them to understand the reading, " Neh. 8:8From 
these interpretations the targums grew. Their present 
written form does not date earlier than the second century 
of our era. They were written in the later Hebrew dialect, 
the Aramaic. 



CHAPTER V. 

ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 

i. How Written. — The oldest existing copies of the 
books of the New Testament, in their original Greek, are 
written upon fine vellum, made from the skins of very 
young calves. Some are written upon parchment, made 
from the skins of sheep or goats. 

The Sinaitic MS. is made of fine skins of antelopes. 
The leaves of this MS. are so large that the skin of one 
antelope would make only two leaves. As the MS. in its 
present fragmentary state has 3462 leaves, and, adding the 
43 previously discovered, 389 \ leaves, it must have required 
195 antelopes to make the vellum on which it is written ! 
The Vatican MS. is written upon vellum admired by all 
who have seen it, for the beauty of its finish and texture. 
It is supposed that earlier copies of the New Testament 
books were written upon less durable papyrus, and hence 
have perished. The manuscript copies of the New Testa- 
ment are older than any existing written copies of the Old 
Testament in Hebrew ; but the oldest MSS. of the New 
Testament contain the whole or large portions of the Old 
Testament in Greek. 

2. Classes. — These ancient MSS. of the New Testament 
may be classified : 

I. By their contents, as (1) those containing the whole 
(52) 






ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OP THE BIBLE. 53 

of the New Testament ; (2) copies containing portions only ; 
(3) those having church lessons. 

II. By their supposed age, as (1) those of the fourth cen- 
tury (the oldest now known) ; (2) of the fifth century ; (3) 
of the sixth century, and so on. 

Or, III. By the style of the writing, as, (1) Uncials, that is 
those written in capitals ; (2) Cursives, that is, those writ- 
ten in a running hand. 

More recently they have also been classified by critical 
scholars according to their genealogical origin, or the 
source from which the text of each MS. was derived. 
Thus MSS. of the New Testament are divided into 
Alexandrian, Western and Neutral groups, to which 
may be added the Syrian and pre-Syrian, or the versions 
before 250 a. d. 

3. The number of uncial MSS. of the New Testament 
now known is about ninety, and of cursives is between one 
thousand and two thousand. Scrivener, Intro. 3d ed. (1883), 
says 97 uncials and 1997 cursives; Abbot (1885) says 92 
uncials and about 1600 cursives, and of distinct uncials 
about 85 ; Dr. Gregory, in Prolegomena to New Testa- 
ment, says SS uncials. 

4. Divisions of the Text. — In the earliest manuscripts 
there are no spaces between the words, and no marks be- 
tween sentences except an occasional dot at the top of the 
line. But there are divisions into paragraphs, and marks 
indicating sections. For example, in the Gospels there are 
numerals marking and dividing the text of Matthew into 
170 unequal sections, Mark into 62, Luke into 150 and 
John into 80. Similar sections, though not as ancient, are 
found in the Acts and Epistles. 

5. Titloi. — In other MSS. of the fifth century and later 



54 ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 

there are divisions into sections or chapters, called rirloi = 
tit/oi, as the title of the section is given with its number. 
These differ from the former divisions, for in the Gospels 
they uniformly begin with what we would regard as the 
second section. The general title to the book was appar- 
ently sufficient to designate the first section. Of these 
titloi = titles, Matthew has 68, Mark 48, Luke 83 and John 
18. There was a similar division of the Acts and Epistles 
into "headings" or chapters, of a later origin. 

6. The Ammonian or Eusebian sections of the Gospels 
was another and different grouping, made to facilitate the 
finding of the different passages that were parallel in the 
four Gospels ; hence some were long and some very short. 
John 19:6, for example, is divided into three sections. 
These sections were numbered in the margin consecutively 
from the beginning of each Gospel. Matthew had 355 
such sections, Mark (originally) 233, Luke 342 and Johfi 
232. Eusebius divided the numbers of these sections into 
ten tables or " canons." The first, in four columns, notes 
the sections that are parallel in all four Gospels ; the next 
three, the sections that are parallel in three of the Gospels ; 
the next five tables note the sections parallel in two of the 
Gospels; the last table gives the sections peculiar to each 
Gospel. 

7. Modern Divisions. — These ancient divisions of the New 
Testament text and similar divisions of the text of the Old 
Testament, coupled with the necessity for some division to 
facilitate ready and accurate reference, led to the modern 
division of the Bible into chapters and verses. The chap- 
ter divisions in our modern Bibles are probably due to 
Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury (about 1220), and the 
versicular divisions to Cardinal Hugo (about 1248). The 



ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OP THE BIBLE. 55 

English Revised Version has restored the more ancient 
method of division of the text into sections or paragraphs, 
but has preserved the modern chapter-and-verse numerals 
in the margin. 

8. Uncial Manuscripts. — Among the most important un- 
cial manuscripts is the Sinaitic (known as «), found by 
Prof. Con tantine Teschendorf, in 1859, in the Convent of 
St. Catherine, on Mount Sinai, and now in the library at 
St. Petersburg, Russia. It contains the whole of the New 
Testament in Greek, the Epistle of Barnabas and part of 
the Shepherd of Hermas, and a large part of the Old Tes- 

tdth ceyceBe^c 

Ml yCTH f/ O N;OCe 

Fourth Cent. Codex Sinaiticus.— 1 Tim. 3 : 16. 
to rrjq evoefieiag \ /ivoTqpiov [6e late corr.] og e. 

tament in the Greek version. It consists of 346} leaves 1 
of very fine thin vellum, 13 J inches long by T4J inches 
wide. The text is written with four columns of 48 lines 
each on a page, except in the poetical books of the Old 
Testament, which have but two columns on a page. The 
words have no spaces between them, and are often abbrevi- 
ated by a line over the letters. There are corrections or 
alterations by later hands in succession, noticeable from 
the different form of the letters and different shades of 
inks, so that Prof. Tischendorf distinguished the work of 
ten different correctors. A fac-simile edition of the MS. 
was printed at the expense of the emperor of Russia, and 



1 To these are to be added 43 leaves found in 1844 and called Codex 
Augustanus, and two leaves and a fragment of a leaf found in 1853 
and belonging originally to this Sinaitic MS., making in all upwards of 
391-J leaves. 



56 ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 

about a dozen copies came to the United States, to several 
important libraries, as the Astor, Lenox and American 
Bible Society libraries. The MS. belongs to the fourth 
century, and Teschendorf supposed it might be one of the 
fifty copies which Constantine had prepared in 331 a. d. 

s CT-Aqicfc£i<SvxeHl6y 



rjrarrg* 



Fourth Cent. Codex Vaticanus. — Mark 16:8. 
Gractg kcil ovSevt ov \ dev einov e(j>o/3ovv \ to yap : 

9. The Vatican manuscript (known as B) also belongs to 
the fourth century, and contains most of the Old Testa- 
ment in Greek and the New Testament to Heb. 9:14. It 
is written on fine vellum, in three columns of 42 lines each 
to a page. It has 759 leaves, 10 by 10 J inches, and is per- 
haps more carefully written than the Sinaitic MS. It is be- 
lieved to have been copied in Egypt, and was brought to 
Rome in 1448. Early in this century it was for a time in 
Paris, but was soon restored to Rome, and is kept in the 
Vatican library. This MS. also shows numerous cor- 
rections by different hands. Several editions of it have 
been printed, the last being that of Tischendorf, 1869, and 
of Vercellone and Cozza, 1868-72. There is another 
Vatican MS. B (No. 2066), containing the Book of Reve- 
lation, which is of later origin and belongs to the eighth 



ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 57 

century. The Vatican MS. is of the first importance in 
critical study of the New Testament text ; and the Sinaitic 
ranks next in value. 

10. The Alexandrian manuscript was sent from the Patri- 
arch of Constantinople as a present to Charles I. (1628), and 
was placed in the British Museum, London, in 1753. It is 
a vellum of 773 leaves, 12 J by 10 J inches, each page contain- 
ing two columns of 50 lines each. It contains nearly the 
whole of the Old Testament in Greek, and of the New 
Testament except Matt. 1 to 25 : 26, two leaves from John's 
Gospel, three from 2 Corinthians, and portions from the 
edges of the leaves, carelessly cut away in binding, Added 
to it are the first Epistle of Clement and a part of the sec- 




N AfVtt H NOAOrOCKAIOAoracM 

ti jroCTtj NeTrHA 1 a c h no* o ro cl. 

Fifth Cent. Codex Alexandrinus. — John I : I. 
Ev apxrj yv Xoyog nai Xoyog rjv \ irpog rov 6\_eo]v: nat 6[eo] grjvo T^oyog, 

ond also. It was probably written in Alexandria in the 
fifth century, and has initial letters, and the first four lines 
of each column of the first page of Genesis in bright ver- 
milion ink. It was among the first of the uncial MSS. 
used by critical scholars. A photographic fac-simile edition 
has been published by the British Museum, 1879-82. 

11. The Ephraem manuscript is in the National Library 
at Paris, France, and consists of 209 leaves, 64 of the Old 
Testament in Greek and 145 of the New. It was brought 
to Florence from the East in the sixteenth century, and is 
a rescript or palimpsest on vellum ; that is, the old writing 
(the Bible text) has been partially effaced and some works 
4 



58 ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 

of Ephraem the Syrian were written over it in the twelfth 
century. The original writing was known to Wetstein 
(1716), and edited by Tischendorf (1843-45). Unfortu- 
nately, large gaps occur in the New Testament text, so 
that 37 chapters of the Gospels, 15 of the Acts, 45 chap- 
ters of the Epistles and 1 1 of Revelation are missing. It 
belongs to the fifth century. 

12. The Greco- Latin manuscript of Beza, in the Cam- 
bridge library, England, contains the Gospels and the Acts. 
These are written on vellum, one column of 34 lines on a 
page, the left-hand page presenting the Greek text and the 
opposite right-hand page having the corresponding Latin 
version. The great scholar and reformer Theodore Beza 
says he found the MS. in Lyons (1562), and he gave it to 
Cambridge University, England, in 1581. The text has 
many interpolations, and has been boldly altered and cor- 
rected by several hands. An edition has been edited in 
ordinary type by Scrivener (1864), which represents the 
MS. line for line. 

13. New manuscripts. — It is quite probable that new 
manucripts of importance may yet be discovered. A new 
uncial MS. is reported to have been found (1890) in the 
Arabic library of Damascus. It is a parchment having 
380^ leaves, 12^ by 13^ inches, and containing the en- 
tire New Testament in Greek, part of the Old Testament, 
and also the Epistle of Barnabas and a portion of the Shep- 
herd of Hernias. The MS. is written with four columns 
of 50 lines each on a page, and from the description seems 
like a companion of the famous Sinaitic MS. But we must 
wait for more definite information about it. 

The remaining uncial MSS. are of secondary importance, 
and do not call for particular description. 



ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 59 

14. The Cursives are a numerous class of manuscripts, 
written in a running hand on vellum or parchment, and 
some of them on cotton or linen paper. They are often 
richly illuminated, and date from the ninth to the middle 
of the fifteenth century, when they were superseded by 
printed copies of the Bible. About 30 of them are known 
to contain the entire New Testament ; others have portions; 
as 600 the Gospels, 300 the Pauline Epistles, 200 the 
Catholic Epistles, 100 the Book of Revelation, while there 
are 350 Evangelistaries, that is, "lessons" from the Gos- 
pels, and so on. A number have been critically collated, 
but most of them do not throw any important light upon 
our present text. 

15. Hebrew Manuscripts. — Written copies of the He- 
brew text of the Old Testament are of comparatively re- 
cent age, the oldest of the Law not being older than 840 
a.d. They have all been written since the period of the 
Massorites. The rule of the old Talmudists was that all 
faulty or imperfect MSS. of their sacred books should be 
destroyed. This may partially account for the scarcity of 
them. But about fourteen hundred different Hebrew MSS. 
have been found and examined by Hebrew scholars — chiefly 
Kennicott and De Rossi. 

16. The Hebrew MSS. are of two classes: those pre- 
pared for use in the synagogue services, and those intended 
for private reading. The rules for preparing the manu- 
script copies of the Old Testament to be used in public 
worship were many and very strict. The parchment must 
be made by a Jew, from the skin of an animal that was 
ceremonially clean. The writing must be in columns ex- 
actly equal in length. If more than three words were off 
the line, the whole work must be thrown aside. It must be 



60 ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 

written with a black ink made according to a specific rec- 
ipe, and the forms of the letters were minutely specified, 
as also the spaces, points and use of the pen. The work 
must be carefully revised within thirty days after the copy 
was completed, and if then there was a letter wanting in a 
word, or if one letter touched another, the manuscript was 
condemned. Manuscripts for private use were subject to 
less rigorous rules. Although these rules must have been 
burdensome to copyists, they were very effective in promot- 
ing the preservation of a purer text of the Hebrew Scrip- 
tures. 

17. The Hebrew Text. — It is not easy to determine the 
precise reading of the text of the Old Testament for the 
reasons already stated. It was formerly supposed that in 
Hebrew the words were written continuously, as in the an- 
cient Greek manuscripts, but the discovery of the ancient 
writing on the Moabite stone indicates that this was not so. 
The words on the Moabite stone are separated by points, 
and the text is separated into parts or verses by vertical 
strokes. There are about 7000 words in the old Hebrew 
vocabulary. 

18. The Massorah is a collection of critical and other notes 
relating to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. These 
were intended to preserve the text in a certain fixed charac- 
ter. The notes of the Massorites referred to — (1) What is in 
the text? (2) What should be in the text? They counted 
the letters ; they marked the wauv in Lev. 11:42 as the 
middle letter in the Pentateuch. They noted that the let- 
ter aleph (A) occurs 42,377 times, and beth (B) 35,288 
times, and so on of each letter in the Hebrew alphabet. 
They noted when a word occurred only once, and a multi- 
tude of other minute points about the text. 



ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE. 61 

But in making a new copy, they sometimes found a word 
in the written copy before them, which they had reason 
to believe was incorrect. They would not alter it, but they 
would write in the margin the consonants of the word they 
believed to be the right one. Then they would add under 
the word in the text the vowel points of the right word 
which they had written in the margin. The word in the 
text they called Kethibh — " What is written; M the word 
in the margin Keri — " What must be read." The ancient 
Hebrew was written without vowels. The vowel points 
were the invention of the Massorites between 500 and 1000 
a.d. to represent and stereotype, as it were, the traditional 
reading of the text which had come down to their time. 
Hebrew can be read, though with greater difficulty, without 
vowel points, or accents. 



CHAPTER VI. 

THE NEW TESTAMENT : HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 

i. The Book a Growth. — The New Testament was a 
growth. The gathering of the separate books into one 
volume was a gradual process. The books to be excluded 
and those to be included in the collection were not selected 
by the decree of any church council, nor decided by an 
apostle or apostolic men ; nor was the collection the result 
of any single inspired act of a Christian Father or scholar, 
nor of a local body of believers, like the church at Antioch, 
Jerusalem or Rome. 

2. The Result of a General Agreement. — The collection 
of the various writings into one book, now called the New 
Testament, was the result of a general agreement among 
all early Christians scattered over the then known civilized 
world. The line between those writings which were re- 
garded " sacred* ' and of divine authority, and those that 
were " apocryphal,' ' was sharply drawn in the fourth cen- 
tury. The persecution of Christians under Diocletian (a.d. 
303) was directed against their sacred books as well as 
against their faith and person. The order was to burn all 
copies of their Scriptures, and Christians were forced to 
give them up or be condemned themselves. Some gave up 
their Scriptures,and were branded as traditores (traitors) by 
their fellow-disciples. Others apparently complied by giv- 
ing up heretical or apocryphal writings, and thus escaped 
(62) 



HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 63 

the censure of the church. This required a definite agree- 
ment among Christians respecting what were and what were 
not Scriptures of divine authority. 

3. A Testing Process. — Such an agreement was not 
reached at once, nor without severely testing a few of the 
writings finally admitted, as Hebrews in the western church, 
and seven books (James, jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, He- 
brews and Revelation) by some in the eastern church. But 
by the end of the fourth century objections and doubts 
respecting those books were silenced. The Latin church 
of the north also concurred in the same list of sacred books, 
and the collection as we now have it was universally re- 
garded as closed. 1 

4. The Tests. — This collection remained "closed " un- 
til the Reformation, in the sixteenth century, when Luther 
and some of the reformers revived doubts in respect to the 
aiitilegojnena books, beeause of the doctrines they were 
supposed to teach. Yet Protestant Christians have with 
great unanimity accepted the strict collection of sacred 
books as it was accepted and "closed" by the early Chris- 
tian church in the third and fourth centuries. 

The crucial tests which a book must pass before it could 
be accepted as of divine authority do not come within the 
scope of these papers. The purpose here is to state, histo- 
rically, what writings were accepted. It may be proper, 
however, to add that Protestants require more than the 
external testimony of the church to certify what writings 
are sacred and of divine authority. Thus Luther against 
Eck said, "A council cannot make that to be of Scripture 



1 See Weiss, Intro., vol. i. p. 119 ff. ; Schaff, Hist. Christn. Church, 
vol. iii. p. 608 ff. ; Eusebius, H. E< % bk. iii. 25, bk. vi. 25. 



64 THE new testament: 

which is not by nature Scripture." Calvin called it " a 
most pernicious error " to hold "that the Scriptures have 
only so much weight as is conceded to them by the suffrages 
of the church; as though/' he adds, "the eternal and in- 
violable truth of God depended on the arbitrary will of 
men." (Inst, i : 7.) The Helvetic, Gallican, Anglican, 
Scotch and Westminster Confessions uniformly maintain 
this principle respecting the Scriptures. The test of a book 
to a place in the Scriptures may be stated as threefold : 

(1) external evidence, as the historic testimony of the church; 

(2) internal evidence from the book itself, determined in 
part by the consensus of Christian scholarship ; and (3) wit- 
ness of the Spirit to the truth and authority of the word in 
the heart of believers. See 2d Helvetic Conf., chaps, i., 
ii. ; Gallican Conf., art. iv. ; Belgian, art. v. ;- Thirty-nine 
Articles, art. vi. ; Scotch Conf., 1560, art. xix. ; Westmin- 
ster Conf., art. i., § 2-5 ; Reuss, Hist. Canon, 313. 

5. Fresh Examination. — Biblical study is taken up afresh 
with each new generation of scholars ; and the object is to 
search for the external and internal evidence concerning 
each New Testament book. The decision depends in part 
upon the test of admission to the collection. The tendency 
is to make this test apply not alone to what is apostolic, 
but to include what belongs to apostolic times and was at- 
tested by the general religious consciousness of early Chris- 
tians. 

6. Formation in the Western Church. — In marking the 
process of gathering apostolic writings into one New Tes- 
tament, let it be noticed that councils and the great Chris- 
tian Fathers did not decide nor so strongly discuss what 
writings ought to be included, as declare what in fact were 
accepted and included among those of divine authority. It 






HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 65 

appears, however, that generally, early Christians devoutly 
applied substantially the same principles to test the nature 
of each book of the New Testament as later Protestant 
Christians have applied. The early Christians further re- 
quired that the books must be written by an apostle or 
apostolic men, and must have been adopted for reading in 
public service. 

In the western church all the writings now in the New 
Testament were readily acknowledged, except Hebrews. 
The hesitation in respect to Hebrews sprang largely from 
the uncertainty as to the author. Some held that it was 
written by Paul, but many doubted its Pauline authorship. 
The frequent contact of western with eastern Christians, 
however, and the studies of Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, 
Rufinus and Jerome, led to the general acceptance of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews in the western church about the 
close of the fourth century, and the New Testament col- 
lection was " closed* ' as we now have it. The West had 
no desire to include other writings beyond these in the 
Scriptures. See Weiss, Intro., vol. i. p. 137. 

7. Formation in the Eastern Church. — It was a more dif- 
ficult process to perfect the collection of New Testament 
writings in the East. At a very early period at least twenty 
books were admitted without question. These were some- 
times called homolegomena, that is, " acknowledged.' ' 
The remaining seven books were referred to as antilegomena, 
that is, "objected to," meaning that some were uncertain 
whether they had a right to a place in the collection or 
not. 

Eusebius wrote a history of the church in the fourth 
century. In his narrative of the first and second centuries 
he gives a statement of the books of the New Testament. 



66 THE new testament: 

He asserts that twenty books were acknowledged without 
question. Some, hesitated to accept Revelation, " but 
others rank it among the genuine. ' ' Among other antilegom- 
ena, or books that were questioned, although he says 
" they are well known and approved by many,' ' he men- 
tions James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John — in all five. He 
then refers to several books as spurious — as the Acts of Paul, 
Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas, Revelation of 
Peter, and Institutions of the Apostles. When Eusebius 
comes to the period of Origen, he quotes the testimony of 
that Father, that the Revelation of John and the Epistle to 
the Hebrews were then accepted, but reports that some 
still have doubts respecting 2 Peter and 2 and 3 John, al- 
though he implies that the many receive them as genuine 
portions of Scripture. H. E. vi. 25. 

8. Early Catalogue of New Testament Books. — In 
the writings that have been preserved of the early Chris- 
tian Fathers of the first four centuries, not less than eight 
or ten catalogues, more or less complete, of the books of 
the New Testament are given, and scores of writers quote 
from the New Testament books as of divine authority. 1 
When it is considered how very small a portion of those 
early writings has come down to us, this evidence will be 
counted of great value. Augustine gives a full list corre- 
sponding to those now accepted, as do Athanasius, Jerome 
and Eusebius. Some of these omit Revelation, and some 
Hebrews also. In all the Christian writings of importance 
belonging to that early period that have come down to us, 
the books of the New Testament are referred to, quoted or 
accepted as sacred and of divine authority. The citations 






1 See Lai dncr's works. 



HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 67 

by some of these early writers, as Justin Martyr of the sec- 
ond century, and Origen, would fill a volume. These ref- 
erences and quotations are widely distributed, including 
writers of each century, from those of Clemens Romanus 
and Ignatius of the first century to those of Augustine, 
Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria, near the close of the 
fourth century. 

9. Process of Forming the Collection. — The beginning and 
the steps in the process of gathering the sacred writings 
into one book of divine authority rest in some obscurity. 
Yet the main features are indicated in the fragmentary 
works of contemporary writers, and accord with similar 
known facts of history. 

While the apostles were proclaiming the gospel, Chris- 
tians looked to them for authoritative instruction, and did 
not feel the need of written teachings upon matters of faith 
and belief. Yet Paul wrote brief instructions to the 
churches he had planted at Thessalonica and in Galatia, 
which are now generally acknowledged to be the earliest 
written books in the form found in the New Testament, 
and date from about the middle of the first century. 1 Most 
of the books have internal evidence that they were written 
before the fall of Jerusalem, a.d. 70; that all of them date 
before the end of the first century has been successfully 
proven. Some critical scholars of the destructive school 



1 Papias, of Hierapolis, in the early part of the second century, 
speaks of fiift'kia — books from which the commands of the Lord might 
be known — and alludes. to a history written by Mark, and a collection 
of "sayings" in Hebrew made by Matthew. Even the epistles of 
Barnabas and of Clement clearly have statements in almost the exact 
words of Matthew. The second epistle of Clement and the Didache 
have clear evidence of the influence of Luke's Gospel. Compare 
Weiss, Intro., i. 38, 39. 



68 THE NEW testament: 

who have sought to maintain a later date have been forced 
to abandon their position and concede a date not far from 
the close of the first century. 

As the number of Christians increased, and became too 
numerous for the apostles and their immediate disciples to 
instruct orally, there was a necessity for writings of authority 
to preserve the church in purity and prevent serious here- 
sies and unbelief. In fact, history tells us that divisions 
and heretical views did prevail in many quarters, and even 
that spurious works were written and circulated under the 
cover of apostolic names. The true believers, therefore, 
gathered the genuine writings of the apostolic age, and the 
New Testament collection began to be formed. In the 
second century, Christian writers, as Dionysius of Corinth 
and Theophilus of Antioch (a.d. 180), refer to the " Script- 
ures of the Lord" as of the same authority as the Old 
Testament. The testimony of history is clear that twenty 
books, comprising eight-ninths of the entire New Testa- 
ment, were thus generally accepted as Holy Scripture by 
the early Christians from 170 a.d. and onward. 

10. Completion of the New Testament. — Although the 
other seven books already mentioned were more slow in 
securing universal acknowledgment, yet they were finally 
so accepted, while others, as the Epistle of Barnabas and 
the Shepherd of Hermas, were rejected. The sharp perse- 
cutions which the early Christians endured, called for a 
most careful and devout spiritual testing of every writing ; 
for the acceptance of a work as "sacred" and of divine 
authority might put their lives in jeopardy. It was only 
natural that some should hesitate to accept a few books, 
perhaps less known from their small size or the peculiar 
character of their contents than were the other books. It 



HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 69 

is not inconsistent with this natural process of gathering the 
books of the New Testament to hold, as some do, that the 
Gospels and Acts were early formed into one collection, to 
which the apostolic teachings were added. Nor is it im- 
probable that these apostolic epistles were circulated by 
themselves for a brief period. But that they were finally 
accepted in the face of such circumstances is strong proof 
of their title to a place in the New Testament. The 
Council of Carthage (397 a.d.) declared that "besides the 
canonical Scriptures, nothing [is to] be read in the church 
under the title of divine Scriptures. M It then adds a list 
of the books accepted as canonical, which besides the Old 
Testament includes the twenty-seven New Testament books 
and no others. 

In this gradual process of sifting out of the mass of writ- 
ings of the apostolic period, and of testing and settling which 
were of divine authority, we find that while several books 
were on the line of doubt and some were rejected, only 
seven of the New Testament books were ever on that line, 
and that these stood the test and were finally admitted. 
The chief hesitation was over five of these books, compris- 
ing only about one-thirty-sixth part of the entire New 
Testament. 

11. Attested by the Church and the Spirit. — The conclu- 
sion is that the great body of early Christians, the general 
church of Jesus Christ, of every speech, East and West, 
Syrian, Asiatic, African and European, devoutly seeking 
to know the mind of Christ, was led by the Spirit of God 
to fix upon these twenty-seven books and no others as the 
New Testament Scriptures having divine authority as the 
word of God. This is far more satisfactory, and gives us 
a much stronger attestation and assurance of the purity 



70 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



and authority of this collection as the word of God, than if 
it had been made and decreed by a church council, or only 
by the early Christian Fathers, as Augustine, Jerome, Ter- 
tullian, Origen, Irenaeus, Cyril, Justin Martyr or Polycarp. 
They testify that the church universal, guided by the Spirit, 
did receive these books as the word of God ; and thus the 
promise of Christ to the apostles was fulfilled : " When he, 
the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the 
truth M (John 16: 13, Revised Version). 



CHAPTER VII. 

WRITERS AND COMPOSITION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT BOOKS. 

i.- Variety in Writing. — All the books now in the New 
Testament were extant and widely accepted as of divine 
authority within one hundred years of the apostolic era. 
The collection was " closed " and universally accepted as 
"Holy Scriptures,' ' of equal rank and authority with the 
Old Testament, within two centuries after the apostolic 
founding of Christian churches. 

The twenty-seven New Testament books were written by 
eight or nine different writers. They had widely different 
temperaments, traits of character and physical circumstan- 
ces, and had, moreover, widely different modes and degrees 
of educational training. 

Paul was the finished Jewish university student, a master 
of logic and of argument. Luke was the Greek medical 
scholar ; Matthew the orderly, practical man of business, 
conversing with equal ease and grace in Aramaic and Greek ; 
while John was the well-to-do fisherman, earnest, medita- 
tive, the man to make a profound Christian philosopher 
when the opportunity came. 

More definitely then, the questions before us are : When, 
by whom, under what circumstances, and with what pur- 
pose, were the twenty-seven books of the New Testament 
originally written ? 

2. Date of the Books. — The thirteen Pauline Epistles 

(71) 



72 WRITERS AND COMPOSITION OF 

(excepting those to individuals) were among the earliest of 
the present written books of the New Testament. They 
may all be safely placed within a limit of fifteen years, 
from a.d. 52 to a.d. 67. 

The date of the Synoptic Gospels and of the Acts may 
with much confidence be placed within the ten years from 
a.d. 60 to a.d. 70. Within the same period may be safely 
placed the pastoral Epistles of Paul, the Epistle to the He- 
brews, and the general Epistles of James, Peter, and Jude. 

The Gospel of John and his other writings — three Epis- 
tles and the Revelation — belong to the last quarter of the 
first century, the Gospel probably dating earliest, from 85 
to 90, the Epistles next, and the Revelation last, from 90 to 
100 A.D. 

3. Writers of the Books. — The names of eight of the 
writers of twenty-six of the New Testament books are cer- 
tainly known. Six of the writers thus named have been 
identified beyond reasonable question. Concerning two 
of them, James and Jude, it is not yet agreed which of the 
several persons called James, nor which of those called 
Jude or Judas, is the author of the respective epistles bear- 
ing these names. 

In eighteen of the New Testament books the writers dis- 
tinctly state their names in the body of their respective 
books. In nine of the books the name of the writer is not 
given in the works themselves. The authors of the nine 
must be ascertained, if at all, from other sources, such as 
the historic testimony of the early Christians immediately 
following the apostolic period, and the internal evidences 
found in the books themselves. For example, the book 
may contain hints pointing to the identity of the writer, 
such as are given in John 21 : 24; with 20 : 31 ; 13: 23, 



THE NEW TESTAMENT BOOKS. 73 

and in the " we " sections of Acts 21:1; 27:1, compared 
with Acts 1 : 1 and Luke 1 : 3. The structure, style and 
topics of a book, by agreeing with what is known of the 
character and circumstances of the person whom history 
indicates as the writer, may confirm the authorship. 

4. The Gospels and the Acts do not give the names 
of their respective authors. Historical testimony from the 
first half of the second century declares that the first Gos- 
pel was written by Matthew, one of the twelve, and who 
was first called Levi. Papias (a.d. 130-160) says, "Mat- 
thew composed his history [of our Lord] in the Hebrew 
dialect, and everyone translated it as he was able." 1 
Irenaeus makes a similar statement, adding that the Gospel 
was written while the apostles were preaching in Rome. 

5. But the Gospel of Matthew, as we now have it, reads 
like a Greek original. Certain passages in which it agrees 
with Mark and Luke indicate that the writer used a Greek 
source. How can it be that the Gospel was written in He- 
brew, and yet our Greek copy not be a translation ? An 
answer is not difficult. Matthew, as a tax collector, would 
become familiar with Aramaic and Greek. For Hebrews, 
he would naturally have first written his Gospel in Aramaic. 
Then the Hellenistic Christians would desire it in Greek, 
and he wrote it in Greek also for them. The Hebrew copy 
has perished, and the Greek alone has been preserved. 
There is a similar parallel in the writings of Josephus in 
the same era. His history of the Jewish wars was first 
written in Aramaic, but afterwards in Greek. The Ara- 
maic copy has perished ; the one in Greek has been pre- 
served to our time. 

1 Eusebius, H. E. 3 : 39. 



74 WRITERS AND COMPOSITION OF 

6. Historic testimony has uniformly fixed upon Mark as 
the author of the second Gospel. 1 Nor is there any reason- 
able doubt that he is the same as John Mark, 2 the son of 
Mary, at whose house Peter found the disciples praying in 
Jerusalem (Acts 12 : 12). His Gospel is frequently quoted 
by Justin Martyr and Irenaeus. The latter says, " Mark, 
the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself also wrote and 
handed on to us what Peter had preached." 

7. That the third Gospel and the Acts were written by the 
same hand is fairly proven by the opening sentences of the 
books themselves (compare Luke 1 : 3 with Acts 1 : 1), and 
by the construction and style of the two treatises. That 
Luke the physician and companion of Paul is the writer, 
history testifies, and the circumstantial evidence derived 
from the books and what we know of Luke confirm that 
testimony. 

8. The Fourth Gospel. — The authorship of the. fourth 
Gospel was for years the chief object of attack by skeptical 
critics. If they could prove that to be not genuine, or not 
trustworthy, they could then hope to destroy the other his- 
toric foundations of Christianity. They signally failed. 
That the apostle John was the writer of that Gospel has 
been established against the severest and strongest critical 
objections. 

The authenticity of the Gospel has been established by 
the fact of the general acceptance of it in the last part of 
the second century, by citations from it as Apostolic 



1 Papias states what John the Presbyter said, " Mark being the inter- 
preter of Peter, whatsoever he recorded he wrote with great accuracy," 
etc. (Eusebius, H. E. 3 : 39). 

2 " Without doubt he is identical with John Mark " (Weiss, Intro , 
2 : 256). 



THE NEW TESTAMENT BOOKS. 75 

Memoirs of Christ by Justin Martyr, by its use among 
various Gnostic sects, and by evidence attached to the book 
itself. See John 21 : 24, 25. * In the face of this irrefra- 
gable evidence, the efforts to deny that John wrote the 
fourth Gospel, because a plain fisherman could not be 
fitted to write such a book, or could not be the author of 
the book of Revelation and of so dissimilar a work as the 
Gospel, are shallow reasonings, or mere "begging the 
question " under color of specious argument. Few would 
believe a priori that a. poor tinker like Bunyan could have 
written the most famous uninspired book in the world, the 
Pilgrim' s Progress ; yet no sane person doubts that Bunyan 
did write it. And who can doubt that the apostle John, 
taught three years by a divine Teacher^ followed by a long 
life of study, observation and experience in Christian 
truth, and guided by the Holy Spirit, could write the Gos- 
pel ascribed to him, and that he would also possess versa- 
tility enough to write a work as different from the Gospel as 
Revelation ? Literary writers on secular topics and of far 
less training and experience show as wide a versatility. It 
is unscientific and puerile to urge that a Christian writer 
with the advantages and experience history assures us that 
John possessed, and with the added power of the Holy 
Spirit, was without equal versatility. The writer of that 
Gospel was a Palestinian Jew, an eye-witness of the events 
he narrates, and the book claims to be by the disciple whom 
Jesus loved. These particulars apply best to the apostle 
John and to him alone. 

1 These verses are commonly held by critical scholars to have been 
added to the Gospel by the elders of the church over which John was 
pastor, and who provided the first copy of his Gospel for transcription. 
See Abbot, Authenticity of the Fourth Gospel \ p. 90. 



76 WRITERS AND COMPOSITION OF 

9. Pauline Epistles. — In each of the Thirteen Epis- 
tles of Paul, the writer distinctly avows himself to be the 
apostle of that name. If they were not by him, then they 
are bold forgeries. Who believes that treatises of this kind 
that were deliberate forgeries would have held or gained the 
confidence of the church universal, and during the life-time 
of many intimate pupils of that great apostle ? None, ex- 
cept the critics of the destructive school of Bauer and 
of Renan, doubt that these epistles were all written by Paul. 
Even they are compelled to admit most of them to be 
genuine. The historic evidence is clear that they were the 
writings of Paul. 

10. The Hebrews. — The writer of the book of Hebrews is 
unknown, or at least undetermined. The authorship was 
an open question as long ago as the days of Origen. In 
the early eastern church the belief was that Paul wrote it, 
or that it was his treatise although it might have been 
penned by Luke or Clement. But in the early western 
church the author was believed to be Barnabas or some un- 
known writer. In later times Luther advocated Apollos as 
the author, while Erasmus urged Clement. 

11. James. — The Epistle of James could not have been 
written by James, son of Zebedee and the brother of John, 
for it was written after the persecution, and hence after 
James was slain by Herod. The writer was a James whose 
pastoral authority he assumed would not be questioned by 
the Jewish Christians " scattered abroad." This fits well 
with what history tells us of James the " bishop " of Jeru- 
salem. Whether he was identical with James the son of 
Alphaeus (which is doubtful) or James the brother of the 
Lord, or was another James, cannot be discussed here for 
want of space. It must suffice to say that it is not incon- 






THE NEW TESTAMENT BOOKS. 77 

sistent with the main historic facts to regard James the 
writer of this Epistle as identical with the " bishop' - of 
Jerusalem and with James the brother of the Lord. 

12. Peter. — The two Epistles of Peter are clearly as- 
cribed to Simon Peter, one of the twelve. The first Epis- 
tle was universally accepted by the early Church as the 
work of Peter, which the style and contents strongly con- 
firm. The author aims to comfort Christians who were 
suffering for their religion. They were the Christian 
Jews scattered through the Roman provinces of Asia 
Minor. The second Epistle claims to be by Peter and 
to be the "second " which he had written (2 Pet. 3 : 1), 
It was held among the doubtful books for some time, but, 
after a careful sifting of the evidences for its Petrine author- 
ship, it was accepted as genuine. The resemblances of 
style between this and the first Epistle are greater than the 
differences, and these differences spring chiefly from the 
different purpose and persons for which the two books were 
written. Hope is the keynote of the first, since those ad- 
dressed were persecuted for their faith. Knowledge is em- 
phasized in the second, since it was written to those ex- 
posed to false teaching, but, in fact, holiness is the theme 
of both Epistles. 

x 3- John' s Epistles. — The First Epistle of John was 
generally received by the early Church as written by John 
the beloved disciple and one of the twelve. In contents 
and style it agrees well with the fourth Gospel. It was in- 
tended to guard against false teachings and to confirm the 
faith of believers in Jesus as the Son of God. It was first 
written for the church at Ephesus and for Christians in that 
region. The two smaller epistles of John were widely, 
though not universally, received as the letters of John in 



78 WRITERS AND COMPOSITION OF 

the time of Origen, and, after long testing, were finally re- 
ceived as genuine. The second is addressed to " the elect 
lady and her children/ ' which probably refers to some 
church in a house, similar to that in the house of Aquila 
and Priscilla (i Cor. 16:19; Rom. 16 : 3, 5). The third 
Epistle of John was written to Gaius, perhaps one of those 
elsewhere named (Rom. 16 : 23 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 14; Acts 19 : 
29 ; 20 : 4). It describes the state of the Church near the 
close of the first century. The date of all John's epistles 
must be placed late in the first century, though possibly a 
little earlier than that of Revelation. 

14. Jude. — The short Epistle of Jude is recognized 
by writers who are silent respecting that of James. Pre- 
cisely which Jude it was who was " the brother of James M 
depends upon which James is intended. If Jude had been 
an apostle, he would naturally have been expected to write 
as an apostle. That he should designate himself as "the 
brother of James " is incidental proof that he was not the 
apostle Jude. He cites some apocryphal books, 1 but so Paul 
also cites from heathen poets. His Epistle reminds one of 
the second Epistle of Peter. These striking resemblances 
have not been very satisfactorily explained. Formerly it 
was suggested that the two writers used a common docu- 
ment, but later critics regard the likenesses either as mere 
coincidences, or that possibly the letter of Peter may have 
unconsciously influenced the language and expression of 
Jude. The letter was apparently written for Palestinian 
Jews, about 67 to 70 a.d. 

15. The Book of Revelation is a product of a period of 
trial and of hope. Clearly it is largely prophetic, and it is 

1 Book of Enochs and, according to Origen, Assumption of Moses, 






THE NEW TESTAMENT BOOKS. 



79 



now generally conceded that it was written by the apostle 
John. The integrity and unity of the book have been 
sharply attacked by modern critics, but their arguments 
have been shown to be weak and their view untenable. The 
interpretation of the book is confessedly hedged about with 
the most serious difficulties. It is the favorite field for the 
mystic, the fanciful and the imaginative biblical expositors. 
There is little doubt that it was first written to warn Chris- 
tians of coming persecutions and to comfort them in their 
terrible sufferings. It points the martyrs to the reward be- 
yond this life and to the peace and glories of the celestial 
home. 

Table of New Testament Books. 

By whom, to whom, when and where written, and the subject of each 

book. 
N. B. — The dates are approximate only. The place of writing is also not certain. 
The titles of the books and the statement at the end of the Epistles in our English 
version are not by the original writer, but were added by some subsequent hand. 



Book. 



Writer. 



i Where 
'Written. 



Matt... 
Mark- 
Luke 

John .... 

Acts 

Rom 

i Cor.... 

2 Cor.... 
Gal 



Matthew.. 
iMark 



Eph 

Phii!.., 

Col 

i Thess. 



Luke.. 

John .. 

Luke.. 
Paul... 



Judaea 

Rome (?).. 

Caesarea or 

Rome(?). 

Ephesus or 



60-64 •••■ 
60-67 •••> 

58-65.... 

or ^ o 1 

Patmos l 90-98 1... 



Date. 



Rome 165, 66 

Corinth.. J58 

Ephesus ...'57 

Macedonia 57 
Ephesus ... 



To Whom. 



Jewish Chris'ns 
Roman Chris'ns. 



Theophilus 

All Christians . 



Rome.. 



Corinth.... 



56,57 — 
61-63.. . 

61-63 

61-63.... 

52 



Theophilus 

Roman Chris'ns. 
Ch. at Corinth.., 

Ch. at Galatia.... 

Ch.at Ephesus... 

Ch. at Philippi... 
Ch. atColosse 

Ch. at Thessal'a. 



Topic. 



Jesus the Messiah. 

Jesus the Son of 
Man 

Jesus the World's 
Redeemer. 

Jesus the Eternal 
Son of God. 

Planting of Apos- 
tolic Churches. 

Sin and Gr,ace. 

Unity and Resur- 
rection in Christ. 

Christian Graces. 

Salvation by Faith. 

Principles, Life 
and Unity of the 
Church. 

Personal Counsels. 

Correcting False 
Doctrines. 

Holiness and Sec- 
ond Coming. 



1 Whether the last chapter is an appendix or not, it is quite clear that 21 : 24, 25 
was added, probably by the Church at Ephesus, before the publication of the Gos- 
pel. Thus it may have been written while John was first at Ephesus, but not cir- 
culated until his exile in Patmos. 



80 WRITERS AND COMPOSITION. 

Table of New Testament Books — Continued. 



Book. 



2 Thess. 

i Tim... 
2 Tim... 
Titus.... 

Philem.. 

Hcb 



James.., 

i Peter. 

2 Peter. 

i John. 

2 John. 

3 John. 



Jude.. 
Rev... 



Writers. 



Paul 

it 

tt 
tt 

Paul, Barnabas 
or Apollos (?) 2 

James, brother 
of the Lord (?) 

Simon Peter.. 

Apostle John. 

Jude 

Apostle John. 



Corinth... 



Where 
Written 



Macedonia 


57 or 65 1 


Rome 


64 or 67 J 


Macedonia 


65 


Rome 


61-63.... 


Italy (?).... 


63-66 


Jerusalem. 


62-63 •— 


Babylon... 


64 




66(?) 


Ephesus... 
tt 


90^95 


Jerusalem. 


65-90 



Date. 



52, 53 • 



Patmos (?) 95-100... 



To Whom. 



Ch. at Thessal'a. 

Timothy 

if 

Titus 

Philemon 

Judaean Chris'ns 



Scattered Jewish 
Christians. 

To all Christians 

Believers 

Elect Lady 

Gaius 

Jewish Chris'ns. 
Seven ch's, Asia. 



Topic. 



Correcting Wrong 
Vi e ws of F i r s t 
Letter. 

Duties of Church 
Officers. 

Triumphant Faith. 

Special Rules f o r 
the Pastor. 

Freedom and Sla- 
very. 

Christ's Priesthood 
Superior to the 
Mosaic. 

Works, Faith and 
Prayer. 

Duties of Christians 
to One Another. 

A New Heaven and 
Earth. 

Redeeming Love. 

Obedience to Christ. 

Personal Piety. 

Against Dangerous 
Doctrines. 

The Church in Con- 
flict and Glory. 



1 The date depends upon whether there was a second imprisonment of Paul at 
Rome. If there was, the latter date is the correct one. 

2 Opinions of critical scholars are now divided between the three, with the ten- 
dency not very strong against the Pauline authorship of Hebrews. 






CHAPTER VIII. 

THE OLD TESTAMENT : HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 

The several books composing the Old Testament were 
written at different times, stretching over a period of about 
one thousand years. They span the ten centuries from 
Moses and the exodus to the return from the Babylonian 
captivity and the era of Ezra and Malachi. Like the build- 
ing of a vast, magnificent palace, the production and gath- 
ering into one book of all these varied writings of the law, 
the prophets and the psalms, was a slow process. 

i. Books in Septuagint Bible. — In the first centuries of 
the Christian era the Septuagint or Greek version of the 
Hebrew Scriptures was in common use. Along with this 
version of the generally-accepted books of the Hebrew 
Bible, certain other apocryphal works were placed for refer- 
ence, and thus came into favor and were not infrequently 
quoted as if those works possessed the authority of the sa- 
cred books themselves. But the sharp controversies of the 
Jews with their opponents caused them to point out precisely 
the real difference between the Greek collection and their 
Hebrew Bible, and to define more clearly the books which 
were accepted as of divine authority — that is, the books 
really comprised in the Hebrew Old Testament. 

2. Testimony of Origen and Josephus. — The early Chris- 
tians also saw the necessity of fixing upon a list in accord 
with the historic belief of the Hebrews. Thus Origen 

(81) 



82 THE old testament: 

(186-254 a.d.) made a list of these Old Testament books, 
based upon the historic views prevailing among the Jews. 
Josephus recognized a definite and distinct body of books as 
sacred. The efforts recently made to belittle the testimony 
of Josephus on this point indicate greater ingenuity than 
candor. It is said that he does not furnish an "authentic 
list. * * But from his definite statement it is certain there 
was a body of sacred books well known and generally ac- 
cepted ; and from other historic sources the books in the 
main can be satisfactorily determined. His words are 
worth citing : " We have not an innumerable multitude of 
books among us, disagreeing and contradicting one another 
[as the Greeks have], but only twenty-two books, which 
contain the records of all the past times; which are justly 
believed to be divine.' ' He then describes them as five 
books of Moses, thirteen written by the prophets, and four 
books of poems and "precepts for the conduct of human 
life." Contra Apion, 1:8. By a common usage of the 
Jews, the books were counted twenty-two (but more fre- 
quently twenty-four), to correspond with the letters in the 
Hebrew alphabet. As the two books of Samuel were reck- 
oned one, and the two of Kings one, and the two of 
Chronicles one, and Lamentations was a part of Jeremiah, 
and the twelve minor prophets were counted one only, the 
collection noted by Josephus is substantially that now ac- 
cepted. It is conceded by Eichhorn and others that Jo- 
sephus quotes all the books of the Talmudic canon except 
four; but two of these must be counted in his four books 
of poetry, to wit, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. This leaves 
only the Song of Solomon and possibly Job uncertain in 
his list. 

3. The Triple Division, — Professor Strackj a. foremost 






HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 83 

Hebraist, holds the statement of Josephus to be of the 
" strongest testimony for the canon, and, as is evident, ex- 
presses the national and not his private views.* ' He further 
urges that, in the twenty-two books, Josephus counted Job 
and the Song of Solomon. Moreover Strack declares that 
the triple division of the books in the Hebrew Old Testa- 
ment is affirmed in the prologue to Sirach, and in the New 
Testament, Luke 24: 44. 1 

4. WJiat Philo and Talmudists say. — The Talmud ists, 
however, commonly reckoned the number of the Old Tes- 
tament books twenty-four. This could easily be made by 
separating some of the books counted as one in the Jewish 
schools of Alexandria. Philo quotes as of divine authority 
thirty of the thirty-nine books; so that, passing by the dis- 
puted passage in his writings mentioning the books that 
were in the Old Testament, he quotes all the books that we 
would expect, from his topic and style, that he would cite, 
except possibly two books. 

5. What Christ and New Testament Writers Say. — To 
this must be added the direct if not conclusive testimony 
of the New Testament. In the apostolic writings it is clear 
that groups of works, and a body of books regarded as a 
unit, are repeatedly alluded to as of divine authority. 
What those separate writings were may and can be ascer- 
tained by evidence sufficient to satisfy a candid and an im- 
partial mind. The Hebrew Scriptures are frequently re- 
ferred to, or quoted under groups of books, as " the law," 
" the law of Moses/ ' or simply "Moses," "the prophets," 
and the psalms, or sometimes " the writings," that is, "the 



1 Professor Briggs (Biblical Study, p. 131) objects to this, but his ob- 
jection is inconclusive. 



84 THE OLD testament: 

Scriptures " in the narrow sense. They are alluded to as a 
unit, one divine record; "the Scriptures' ' in the broader 
sense. 1 

Christ quoted the Jewish "Scriptures" as sacred books 
of divine authority. By " Scriptures ' ' he did not refer 
simply to the K'tubim or Hagiographa, that is, the so- 
called third group ; for the passages thus cited were fre- 
quently from the prophets, which belonged to the so-called 
second group. For example, " not knowing the Script- 
ures," Matt. 22: 29, 31, evidently has reference to Ex. 
3:6; and " how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled ?" 
refers to Isa. 53 : 10; and a similar phrase in Mark 15 : 28 
is followed by a citation from Isa. 53 : 12. 

6. Old Testament Books Quoted in the New. — Not 
less than thirty of the thirty-nine Old Testament books 
are quoted in the New Testament. Our Lord Himself 
quotes from twenty of them. There are about 280 direct 
quotations (including those in Revelation) of passages and 
clauses, and about 220 references to incidents and indirect 
quotations in the New Testament (exclusive of Revela- 
tion) 2 from the Old Testament. The book of Revelation 



1 For notice of the Old Testament books in the commonly-accepted 
groups, see Matt. 5:17; 7 : 12 ; 12:5; 22 : 40; Mark I : 2 ; John 
1 : 45 ; 7:19; 8:5; 15 : 25 ; Luke 10 ; 26 ; 24 : 44. For reference 
to them as one work, see Matt. 21 : 42 ; 22 : 29 ; 26 : 54 ; Mark 12 : 24 ; 
14:49; Luk e 24:27,32,45; John 5:39; Acts I7;2, 11 ; 18:24; 
Rom. 1:2; 15:4; 16:26; 1 Cor. 15:3; 2 Tim. 3:15; 2 Pet. 
3:16. Those who assert that when Jesus referred to the group called 
the Psalms, which included all the books not in the groups of the law 
and of the prophets, he referred only to the single book of Psalms 
and not to the group so called, are simply " begging the whole ques- 
tion " at issue. 

2 Some older writers roughly counted 265 direct quotations and 350 
allusions in the New Testament from the Old. The latest tables in 
Bagster's new " Helps to Bible Study " note about 850 such direct 



HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 85 

is almost a mosaic of thoughts, figures and expressions, 
from the prophetic books of the Old Testament. 1 

Again, the numerous citations in the Gospels and Epistles 
clearly indicate that some divisions in the Hebrew Script- 
ures were recognized and well known in that era, while 
at the same time all these groups were known as one work, 
called, by way of eminence, " the Scriptures. ' ' 

7. The Synod of Jamnia. — It is generally agreed that 
the books rightfully having a place in the Jewish Script- 
ures were definitely fixed by the assembly or council at 
Jamnia, in the time of the Jewish war with Titus about 
a.d. 70. There was a dissenting minority among the Es- 
senes and Zealots, who would include apocryphal books, 
and doubtless some among Sadducees and Samaritans, all 
of whom held views of doctrines more or less heretical. 
But the majority of the assembly agreed upon the gener- 
ally accepted books held to be of divine authority. 

Some of the Grecian Jews of Alexandria were broad in 
their views, favoring the apocryphal books, and had placed 
them in their Greek version of the Old Testament ; but 
there was no Alexandrian canon. 2 The Sadducees would 
naturally reject any book that favored future life and a 
resurrection, doctrines which they denied ; while the Sa- 

and indirect quotations and allusions. The tables in Oxford " Helps 
to the Study of the Bible " give a good list of exact quotations and a 
somewhat less complete list of indirect quotations and allusions. 

1 From a careful examination of the book of Revelation, it appears 
that in fifteen passages the book of Revelation uses the exact language 
and expressions of some Old Testament book, besides 129 distinct 
allusions to the Old Testament, and upwards of 100 less distinct refer- 
ences. Bagster's " Helps" note only six citations, aside from "allu- 
sions " in Revelation to the Old Testament. 

2 The old Syrian Church did not accept the Old Testament Apoc- 
rypha. The books are not in the Peshito version, though found in 
later Syrian versions. 



86 THE OLD testament: 

maritan party was loth to accept any except the five books 
of Moses as of divine authority. Yet the ablest Biblical 
scholars maintain that the Jews of Egypt held that the 
same books belonged to the Old Testament, as did the 
Jews of Palestine. 1 

8. How Formed. — It is natural to suppose that special 
veneration of sacred books written by authors of promi- 
nence would first appear, and that too when the power of 
the revealing spirit had been exceptionally clear and strong. 
This would begin with the books of Moses and those asso- 
ciated with them, and then extend to the more earnest and 
spiritual of the prophets. 2 How much earlier than the 
Council of Jamnia the entire collection of Old Testament 
books was completed and fixed it is not possible definitely 
to state. The statement of Josephus implies a date some 
centuries before the Christian era. He says, after the pas- 
sage quoted above, "How firmly we have given credit to 
these books of our own nation is evident by what we do ; 
for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has 
been so bold as either to add anything to them, to take 
anything from them, or to make any change in them ; but 
it is become natural to all Jews. ... to esteem these books 
to contain divine doctrines, to persist in them, and if oc- 
casion be, willingly to die for them." Contra Apion, i : 8. 

Josephus here advocates the Hebrew Scriptures as 
against Greeks, and appears to point to the persecution 
against the sacred books of the Jews which followed the 
Maccabsean wars about 160 b. c. It seems fair to infer, 
therefore, that the Hebrew Scriptures, accepted in Jose- 



1 So Eichhorn, De Wette, Keil and Havernick. Bleek and some 
others dissent. 

* So Dr. Dillmann argues. 



HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 87 

phus* day were completed and accepted at the period of 
this persecution. The Son of Sirach, in a prologue to 
Ecclesiasticus, strengthens this view by his testimony. 

9. Ezra and the Great Synagogue. — There is, indeed, an 
oral tradition, reduced to writing at a later period, that the 
collection of Old Testament books was made under divine 
appointment by Ezra, or by the hundred and twenty men 
of the Great Synagogue ; but this tradition, though widely 
prevalent among the Jews for centuries, has not been traced 
to any satisfactory historical sources, and is stoutly dis- 
puted by modern critical scholars. Whether the collection 
of Old Testament books was or was not made by the Great 
Synagogue, or by Ezra, Nehemiah or Malachi, or some of 
the last of the prophets, it is certain that there was such a 
complete collection for two or three centuries, at least, be- 
fore the Christian era, and that there was a book of the 
law, the germ of the collection of divine authority, known 
eight or ten centuries earlier. See 2 Chron. 34: 15 ; Josh. 
1:8; 8 : 34 ; Deut. 30 : 10 ; 31 : 26. 

10. Slow Growth. — The New Testament was the product 
and result of a single century; the Old Testament the 
growth of ten centuries, and of great eras in the Hebrew 
national life. It was certainly complete and well defined in 
the period of persecution of Anciochus (168 B. c.) In 
that period the sacred books were sought out and burnt, and 
possession of a " book of the covenant " was punished by 
death. 

11. Objections Answered. — The dissent from the strict 
Jewish list of Old Testament books is only partial and ap- 
parent, not real or partaking of any national character. 
The unsettled state of the Hebrew people after the exile, 
their persecutions and distracting wars, and the various 



88 THE OI/D testament: 

heresies that sprang from interchanging with Gentile peo- 
ples, account for the t( controversies " respecting their 
religion and sacred books. There was no serious question- 
ing of the divine authority of the books ; nor are the few 
references to the apocryphal books any conclusive proof 
that they were regarded as Scriptures. Philo never uses 
the apocryphal in the same way that he does the canonical 
books. Josephus expressly disclaims divine authority for 
the apocryphal writings. 1 

It is safe, therefore, to conclude, from historical and 
other evidence, that the books of the Old Testament were 
gathered into one and accepted as of divine authority by 
the general consensus of godly Jewish people, and that the 
collection was completed from two to three centuries be- 
fore the Christian era. This collection has been generally 
accepted as the entire books belonging to the Old Testa- 
ment by the early Syrian Church and by all bodies of 
modern evangelical and Protestant churches. The Latin 
Church accepted the same also, with the addition of some 
apocryphal books. 

12. Order of the Books. — The order of the Old Testa- 
ment books in the Hebrew Bible is not the same as in our 
common English Bibles. In the face of the rigid rules 
for making copies of the Hebrew Scriptures, the variations 
found in Hebrew manuscripts and in Hebrew printed 
Bibles number about thirty thousand (some estimate two 
hundred thousand), but they are mostly quite unimportant. 
The Old Testament we have now is substantially that of 



1 " It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very 
particularly, but it hath not been esteemed of the like authority with 
the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an exact 
succession of prophets since that time." — Contra Apion, I ; 8. 



HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 89 

Ezra and Nehemiah and the " received text M of our Lord's 
day, except as to the order of arranging the books. 

13. The Hebrew order varied, but the following is a 
common one : 

I. Pentateuch. — Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, 
Deuteronomy. 

II. Earlier Prophets. — Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 

1 and 2 Kings. 

III. Later Prophets. — {a) Greater: Isaiah, Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel. (b) Lesser : Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, 
Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, 
Malachi. 

IV. K'tubitn or Hagiographa. — (a) Psalms, Proverbs, 
Job. (p) Five Rolls, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, 
Ecclesiastes, Esther. (V) Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, 1 and 

2 Chronicles. 

It will be observed that the Hebrew Old Testament 
closes with the Chronicles regarded as one book. This 
will throw light on the reference to " Abel and Zachariah " 
as the first and last-mentioned martyr (Matt. 23 : 35). An 
earlier Hebrew arrangement, it is held, existed, by which 
Ruth was a part of or appendix to Judges, and Lamentations 
to Jeremiah. The books of Samuel were one, as also the 
two books of Kings, and the twelve minor prophets one, 
thus making twenty-four books in the Hebrew Bible. 

14. Supposed Variations in the Lists of Books. — The his- 
torical facts in favor of the authority of the Old Testament 
books now received by evangelical Christians, have not 
really been weakened by exaggerating the variations from 
that list. For example, it is asserted that there was (1) a 
Sadducean, (2) a Samaritan, and (3) an Alexandrian canon 
of the Old Testament. There is no historical proof that 



90 THE OLD TESTAMENT! 



nd 
'he 

Via 



the Sadducees received the books of Moses only, and 
did not receive the other Old Testament books. The 
Samaritan mixed population, which broke away from the 
Jews and set up a worship and temple on Mt. Gerizim, did 
restrict their Old Testament canon to the five books of 
Moses. The Alexandrian Jews, on the other hand, did put 
other books with the books of the ordinary Hebrew Old 
Testament, without distinctly marking the difference ; but 
it is not proven that the mass of even those Jews accepted 
them all as of divine authority. Added to these three, are 
others more recent as: (4) the Patristic list, that grew out 
of the Alexandrian or Septuagint version, which failed to 
draw a sharp line between the canonical and apocryphal 
books. From this, again, came (5) the Roman Catholic 
canon. By the Council of Trent, 1546, it was declared 
that the larger canon including the Apocrypha was deserv- 
ing of " equal veneration " with the other books ; but later 
Romanists of intelligence have sought by various devices 
to escape from this decisive decree. On the same side 
some count (6) the Greek Church, But that church is di- 
vided on the question, or at least is not consistent in its 
edicts. The Synods of Constantinople, 1638, Jassy, 1642, 
lalem, 1672, refused to distinguish the canonical from 
rhw apocryphal Old Testament books, although Cyril of 
Constantinople did so mark them. The Larger Catechism 
of that church, Moscow 1839, an authoritative doctrinal 
fvandard of the church in Russia, excludes the apocryphal 
Old Testament books on the ground that " they do not ex- 
ist in Hebrew." The Old Catholic Union, 1874, declares 
"that the apocryphal or deutero-canonical books of the 
Old Testament are not of the same canonicity as the books 
contained in the Hebrew canon.' ' They also say that no 






HOW AND WHEN ONE BOOK. 91 

translation can have superior authority to the original text. 
(7) The Protestant canon conforms to the traditional He- 
brew list, and is based on the most ancient and the highest 
authority. Luther translated the Old Testament apocry- 
phal books and commended them for private reading, but 
did not count them of like divine authority with the books 
in the ancient Hebrew canon. The church of England al- 
lows the use of the apocryphal books "for example of life 
r in instruction of manners : but yet doth it not apply to 
them to establish any doctrine." The Belgic Confession 
holds a similar position. The Westminster Confession ex- 
pressly declares them to be of no more value than other 
human writings; " The books commonly called Apocrypha, 
not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon 
of Scripture; and therefore are of no authority in the 
Church of God, nor to be otherwise approved or made 
use of than other human writings." Chap. I. §3. The 
various evangelical bodies of Christians clearly agree in 
uniformly omitting the Apocrypha from the list of sacred 
books. 



CHAPTER IX. 

THE BOOKS OF THE LAW : THEIR AUTHORSHIP AND COM- 
POSITION. 

That part of the Bible which begins with the creation 
and ends with the death of Moses, in early times was writ- 
ten in one Hebrew roll, or book. In the Greek translation 
it was arranged in five books, as now in our English Bibles. 

i. Name. — These five books are often called " The Pen- 
tateuch/ ' from the Gr^ek 6 kzvtcltzvxoq (ho pentateuchos), 
meaning " the five-volumed M book. The Hebrews call it 
Tor ah, "Law," and, more fully, "The Law of Moses." 
The unity of this entire portion of the Scriptures is 
founded upon history and the close continuity of the con- 
tents of the books. For example, in Hebrew manuscripts, 
Genesis is reckoned not as one of five books, but as one part 
of one book. A Hebrew conjunctive word connects Exo- 
dus with Genesis, as it does each of the five books except 
Deuteronomy. 

2. Division. — The division into five books is ascribed 
by some to the Alexandrian translators (285 B.C.), and by 
others to the Maccabsean period, or possibly to the era of 
Ezra. The one roll, however, continued to be referred to 
as " The Law M even to the time of Christ ; for under this 
title he quoted several of the first five books. 1 The title of 

1 Matt. 12 ; 5, *\ g., refers to Numbers ; Luke 10 : 26, 27 to Deuter- 
onomy and Leviticus ; Luke 2 : 22, 23 to Exodus and Leviticus, etc., but 
under the one designation, The Law. 

(92) 



THE BOOKS OF THE LAW. 93 

each of the five separate books in our English version is 
derived through the Latin from the Alexandrian Greek 
version. These titles indicate the topic or contents of the 
respective books. Genesis tells of the birth or creation of 
the world ; Exodus, of the exodus or departure of the He- 
brews from Egypt ; Leviticus, of the law or rules of worship; 
Numbers, of the census of the people in the wilderness \ 
and Deuteronomy — meaning " the second law M — is a sum- 
mary or re-statement of the law. The Hebrew title for 
each of these books (when they note any division) was the 
first words with which each book began. The writers often 
referred to the roll as "Moses" or "The Law," and 
pointed out the place by the first word or words of the 
section, as "the bush," Luke 20: 37, which is the phrase 
there used to refer to the section in Ex. 3 : 6. This ap- 
pears clearly in the Revised Version. 

The Talmud and Ancient Jewish Bibles divided " The 
Law " into fifty-four sections called Perashioth ; and these 
were again subdivided into smaller sections and classed 
under two heads, " Open " sections, and " Shut." These 
were marked by P or S to catch the reader's eye. Possibly 
this is the origin of the " \ " in modern Bibles. One of 
these longer sections was to be read each Sabbath of the year. 
Broadly, then, Genesis may be called the book of beginnings; 
Exodus, the book of deliverance ; Leviticus, the priestly 
book ; Numbers, the book of marches and of wars; Deuter- 
onomy, the statute or code book of the Hebrew people. 

3. Authorship, — The uniform historic testimony of early 
Christian, of Hebrew and of heathen writers is that Moses 
was believed to be the writer of the Pentateuch or first 
five books of the Bible. This view has been held, practi- 
cally without question, until comparatively recent times. 



94 THE BOOKS OF THE LAW: 



The Talmud says, " Moses wrote his book, the Pentateuch 
with the exception of eight verses, the last eight verses, 
which were written by Joshua.' ' Philo and Josephus held 
that these books were written by Moses. "Newer crit- 
icism" has reopened the question. It concedes that He- 
brew testimony and tradition say Moses was the author ; 
but is tradition right? or was the "Law" compiled by 
Samuel, Solomon, Josiah, Ezra, or by some unknown " re- 
dactor " of a later period? 1 These theories have been 
varied, progressing from one hypothesis to another, or dis- 
agreeing among themselves as to the authorship and com- 
position of the books. 

Astruc (1760) held that Genesis was composed of two 
different documents by two writers. Then this "docu- 
mentary " character was declared to run through the three 
books following Genesis; the documents being loosely put 
together. Then came a " fragmentary ' ' theory, which 
pushed aside the documentary one. It was claimed that 
the "Elohistic" portion was the possible basis, but that 
there was a multitude of other fragments. This was again 
changed to the view that the three or more so-called orig- 
inal " documents " were themselves composite works, and 
were wrought into one composite work by some unknown 
"redactor," and probably two or three successive " redac- 
tors." No sooner are the difficulties of the position on 
one theory shown than objectors shift to another theory. 2 



1 Ben Ezra, of the twefth century, feebly raised this inquiry. It was 
revived by Carlstadt, Spinoza, Astruc, Eichhorn and Hupfeld. These 
have been followed by Bleek, Graf, Wellhausen, Robertson Smith and 
others of the more or less destructive and radical schools of critics. 
It is not unfair to charge that the tendency of this criticism is to deny 
or minify the divine element, the supernatural, in the Scriptures. 

2 In general it may be stated that according to this " newer criti- 



:: 



THEIR AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 95 

Closely related to the author and mode of composition 
of the five books is the date of these several portions. 
Some have urged that the " priestly code " (Elohistic) was 
the oldest ; others have as stoutly maintained that it was 
the newest and surely belonged to the post-exilic era. 

4. Composition. — This uncertain sea of speculation may 
be left to its own tossings. Aside from inferences, what 
do the books definitely say respecting their authorship and 
composition ? 

(1) There is no definite avowal of authorship that can 
surely apply to the entire Pentateuch ; but it must apply 
to a very large portion, especially of the code. For ex- 
ample, God commanded Moses to write the words of the 
covenant (Ex. 34: 27); Moses declared these words to 
Israel (Ex. 35 : 1). Again, it is declared in Deut. 31 : 24, 
26, that "when Moses had made an end of writing the 
words of this law in a book, until they were finished, that 
Moses commanded the Levites, . . . Take this book of the 
law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of 
the Lord your God." This is a distinct assertion that 
Moses was the writer of some Hebrew code of laws. 

(2) The whole history is chiefly given in the third 
person. " The Lord spake unto Moses " frequently occurs. 
"And Moses commanded, " "Moses said," or "the words 
of Moses,' ' are other expressions frequently found in the 
Pentateuch. 

(3) Deut. 34 records the death of Moses. This was 
added by a later hand (see "unto this day" of v. 6), 
probably during the period of the judges. 



cism " the Pentateuch was composed in three or more portions, called 
the Elohistic, Jehovistic and Deuteronomic. 






96 THE BOOKS OF THE LAW: 

(4) The five books contain several remarkably graphic 
and interesting biographies. Yet obviously the main pur- 
pose of these books is not biography, nor personal or 
local history. The object is clearly to record the origin 
of the Hebrew people and to chronicle their early national 
annals. 

(5) Is this form not the one most suitable for national 
annals ? Indeed, if these books were intended as authentic 
theocratic records of the origin of the race, and of the 
Hebrew nation in particular, would not the impersonal 
form be the most natural one ? In official annals of gov- 
ernment, the identity of the writer is of smaller importance 
than the authenticity of the record. Moses, as the great 
lawgiver of Israel, would be expected to leave some au- 
thorized copy of the laws received for the people. Hebrew 
writers say he did leave such a record in the Pentateuch. 
There is nothing in the books themselves against their 
general Mosaic authorship. There are many incidental 
evidences in favor of it, — particularly that they were 
written as national annals by direction and authority of 
Moses ; the death of Moses being added by an authorized 
successor. Since, however, the discussions respecting the 
composition and date of the Pentateuch are pressing upon 
popular attention, a few leading points may be helpful in 
showing the character of the conflict. 

5. Against the traditional view > beside the literary and 
linguistic argument, the newer criticism urges — (1) That 
the Pentateuch sanctions one central place of worship. 
But it is said that several places were allowed up to the time 
of Josiah. To this it may be said, one, the tent, prevailed 
in the wilderness: (2) Leviticus requires priests to be of 
the family of Aaron, while Deuteronomy and Judges ap- 



THEIR AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 97 

pear to treat Levites as priests. (3) The Levitical cities 
named in the Pentateuch, it is asserted, are not to be found 
as such in history. (4) The feasts were not observed as 
the Pentateuch required. (5) The details of the narrative 
and history of the Hebrew worship are said to be against 
the early Mosaic date. 

6. In favor of the antiquity and Mosaic authority of the 
Pentateuch is urged — (1) The uniform testimony of past 
ages, as already noted. It is remarkable that a non-Mosaic 
origin and a late date for the Pentateuch should be left for 
a few recent critics to discover, and throws suspicion upon 
the theory. 

(2) The use of any existent documents that were acces- 
sible in composing the theocratic history in the Pentateuch 
does not impair the divine authority, or Mosaic authorship, 
of the books. But the critics cannot agree upon criteria 
that will enable us to determine definitely any of these 
fragments ; hence they cannot demonstrate that any were 
incorporated, though they may have been used in com- 
posing the Mosaic books. 

(3) If the books were written as the destructive critics 
claim, it is difficult to clear the authors of literary fraud. 
It is well-nigh inconceivable that writings cast in such a 
high moral, solemn and spiritual tone could be written by 
those who would deliberately deceive readers. 

(4) There is no historic evidence of the existence of 
separate documents. The opposers to the Mosaic origin 
of the books have had no agreement among themselves 
about them. They do not agree upon the number or limit 
of the original " fragments/ ' nor upon their age. Those 
that are claimed as latest by some are also asserted to con- 
tain some earliest records by others. 



98 THE BOOKS OF THE LAW: 

(5) The Hebrew people must have had laws and a his- 
tory for ages previous to the exilic period. The new theory 
of the Pentateuch leaves them practically without either. 
The records of the five books of Moses, however, fit well 
with what we know of Egypt and other nations in the Mo- 
saic era. Grant for a moment that this is not history : 
here stands Moses, the greatest name in ancient records as 
lawgiver, reformer and general, to be accounted for. How 
did he get into history ? 

(6) Early Hebrews, though enslaved in Egypt, were not 
a savage horde. The monumental records of the Mosaic 
age constantly coming to light are confirming the civiliza- 
tion existing in the land where they dwelt and the accuracy 
of the Mosaic records. 

(7) The weight of literary and linguistic facts, in truth, 
tells strongly for the Mosaic composition and antiquity of 
the Pentateuch. The language has an infusion of Egyptian 
words ; yet the system of religious worship is in sharp 
contrast with Egyptian sacrifices and worship. The place 
of worship is the tent (tabernacle) ; excommunication is to 
be " cast out of the camp; " the scapegoat goes into the 
wilderness; all the ritual speaks of the wandering life, 
consistent with the belief that the main portion of the Pen- 
tateuch was written at the period and in the region where 
it professes to have been written. The ark had the law ; 
and the ark certainly dates to the wilderness life. 

(8) Finally, the archaic quality in the language of the 
Pentateuch is marked; the apparent tinges of a later speech 
are too few to weigh against the weightier evidence for the 
antiquity of the writing. Recent discoveries are increasing 
the proofs for the Mosaic age and composition ; while all 
the material objections of modern criticism can be ex- 






THEIR AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 99 

plained upon the Mosaic theory. The objectors are beset 
with more numerous and far greater difficulties. They 
must reconstruct Hebrew history, account for the long- 
existing belief in regard to that history as popularly ac- 
cepted, and explain the monumental and other records 
which fit well into Hebrew history as hitherto understood, 
and which imply the early existence of the Hebrew people 
in conditions similar to those described in the Mosaic 
books. 

(9) The change in the style and character of the latter 
portion of the Pentateuch, in comparison with the first, is 
readily accounted for by the supposition that forty years 
intervened between the composition of the first portion, 
up to the report of the spies and the consequent judgment, 
and the latter, including the Deuteronomic portion. The 
writer, after forty years of added experience, would natu- 
rally take on new forms and expressions in his compo- 
sition. 

(10) The annals bear marks of being composed at or near 
the period of their occurrence. A writer making such a 
record centuries later would almost surely fall into errors 
and anachronisms which the earlier monumental records 
would expose. Such a composition without errors would 
itself be a greater miracle than the gift of supernatural 
guidance by divine inspiration. 

(11) The New Testament evidence cannot be blown 
aside by a breath. Jesus says of Moses, " He wrote of 
me" (John 5: 46, 47). So also, "beginning at Moses, 
. . . he," etc. (Luke 24: 27). The conclusion then is 
that the historic evidence respecting the Mosaic authorship 
and antiquity of the first five books of the Bible is entirely 
trustworthy, and modern research and adverse criticism 



100 



THE BOOKS OF THE LAW. 



have caused new and yet stronger evidence to be brought 
to light in support of that view. 1 



1 The literature on this subject is abundant. Those who desire a 
brief statement of the Wellhausen theory, which just now is prominent 
in the disintegrating schools of criticism, may refer to the article 
" Pentateuch" in the Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th ed. For the evan- 
gelical view, see Bissell's Pentateuch : its Origin and Structure, 1885 ; 
also Pentateuchal discussions, Profs. Harper, Green and others, in He- 
dratca, vols. v. and vi., 1889-90. 



CHAPTER X. 

HISTORICAL (O. T.) BOOKS : AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 

Grouping the Old Testament books according to their 
contents, there are twelve almost wholly historical. In the 
order of the books found in English Bibles these twelve 
historical books follow the five books of the law. They 
begin with Joshua and end with Esther. 

i. Hebrew Order, — In the Hebrew Bible six of these 
books, from Joshua to 2 Kings inclusive (not counting 
Ruth), are in a separate division called " Earlier Prophets." 
They were so named by the Massorites, because these 
books recount the deeds of prophets, and Jewish tradition 
declared that they were written by prophets. The other 
six historical books are placed in the last division, the 
Hagiographa of the Hebrew Bible, following the Psalms, 
Ruth having the 5th place in that division, Esther the 8th, 
Ezra the 10th, Nehemiah the nth and the Chronicles the 
last and closing one of the Hebrew Scriptures. 

2. Period Covered, — These twelve historical books cover 
about 1000 years of Hebrew history from the death of 
Moses to the restoration and rebuilding of the temple after 
the great exile. This history of ten centuries may be di- 
vided into three unequal periods : from the death of Moses 
to Saul, about 350 years; from Saul's accession to the fall 
of Samaria, about 375 years; from the fall of Samaria to 
the restoration of the temple and Jerusalem after Nehemiah, 

(101) 



102 HISTORICAL (O. T.) BOOKS: 

about 300 years. Or, again, the era covered by the his- 
torical books may be divided into — (1) the Conquest of 
Canaan (Joshua) ; (2) The Rule of Judges (Judges, Ruth 
and 1 Sam. 1 to 12); (3) The United Monarchy (1 Sam. 
12 to 1 Kings 12, and 1 Chron. 1 to 2 Chron. 10); (4) 
Tlie Two Monarchies (1 Kings 12 to 2 Kings 25 and 2 
Chron. 10 to 36) ; (5) The Exile and Restoration (Esther, 
Ezra and Nehemiah). The books have little regard to 
periods in the history. 

3. Authors. — The authors of the twelve historical books 
are not definitely known. According to Jewish tradition 
the chief writers of them were Joshua, Samuel, Jeremiah, 
Ezra and Nehemiah. Only a brief notice of each book 
can be given. 

4. Joshua is so named from the exploits of the hero de- 
scribed in it, and not as a mark of authorship. Modern 
critics have grouped it with the five books of Moses, and 
called the whole "The Hexateuch." They would also 
date its composition near the exilic or even post-exilic era 
and by some unknown writer. Jewish and Christian tradi- 
tion and reverent scholars assign its authorship to Joshua 
(except the last five verses), and say that it was composed 
at the period of the conquest by an eye-witness, and from 
documents of that time. See for example the address of 
Joshua in chaps. 23, 24, and the record of his interviews 
with Jehovah, chaps. 1, 3, 5, 7. The few single clauses 
which destructive critics urge as proving a later date may 
have been marginal notes by Samuel or some prophet of 
Saul or David's time. They fail to prove a later composi- 
tion of the book. A careful study of Joshua is the best 
foundation for a right mastery of Hebrew history. 

5. Judges. — This book is so named because it records 



AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 103 

the deeds of some of the early judges (about thirteen) who 
were raised up to deliver Israel from the oppression of 
hostile nations and tribes on its borders. The length of 
the period covered by this book is variously computed from 
250 to 450 years. The supposed reference to the length 
of this period in the speech of Paul (Acts 13 : 19, 20) is 
now generally regarded as referring not alone to the period 
of the judges, but to the possession of the land from the 
Abraham ic promise to Joshua. " He gave them their land 
for an inheritance, for about four hundred and fifty years : 
and after these things he gave them judges until Samuel' ' 
(Acts 13 : 19, 20, Revised Version). It is evidently a book 
of annals. The author is not known, though the Talmud 
ascribes it to Samuel, and this is a popular belief. It ap- 
pears to have been gathered from various documents, to 
impress moral and religious lessons. The difficulties of the 
book are the chronology, apparently two introductions, and 
the adjustment of the rule of the several judges. It con- 
tains some of the most deeply interesting biographical 
sketches in the Old Testament. The reader never wearies 
of the stories of Gideon, Samson, Deborah and Jeph- 
thah. 

6. Ruth. — The book itself fixes the period when the 
beautiful heroine lived. It was "in the days when the 
judges ruled" (Ruth 1 : 1). But this does not fix the 
date of its composition. Unless the closing verses were 
added by another than the original author, it cannot have 
been written before the time of David. In the Hebrew 
Bible it is placed as the fifth book after the Psalms. In the 
Septuagint it follows Judges, as in English Bibles. His- 
torically it may be counted an appendix to Judges and an in- 
troduction to the books of Samuel . It may have been written 



104 HISTORICAL (O. T.) BOOKS : 

by Samuel, as one Jewish tradition asserts. The Arama- 
isms, which are supposed by some to indicate a later date, 
are represented as spoken by foreigners and are not in the 
language of the author. They are not conclusive against 
an early date. Nor is the mention of "plucking off the 
shoe" against, but rather in favor of, its composition as 
early as the period of David. The book is a touching and 
dramatic picture of domestic life in that period. 

7. Samuel. — The two books of Samuel were originally 
one in the Hebrew Bible. Even the Massoretic note at the 
end of the second book, giving the number of verses, treats 
them as one book. The Septuagint regarded the books of 
Samuel and of Kings as a complete history of the Hebrew 
kingdom, and divided them into four, calling them " Books 
of the Kingdoms.' ' This division is followed in the Latin 
and Douay versions, where they are named the 1st, 2d, 3d 
and 4th Books of Kings. The division was introduced 
into Hebrew printed Bibles in 15 18. 

The author of the first two, now called 1 and 2 Samuel, 
is unknown. The name of the books probably arises from 
the fact that Samuel is the hero of the first part. Samuel 
could have written only twenty-four chapters of the first 
book, since the twenty-fifth chapter records his death. 
The contents indicate that official records may have been 
consulted by the writer, and national hymns were incor- 
porated in the work, as the song of Hannah (1 Sam. 2:1- 
10); David's song over Abner (2 Sam. 3:33, 34); his 
thanksgiving song, and his farewell song (2 Sam. 22; 23 : 

1-7). 

The date of composition was not later than Solomon s 
time, as the language proves. "It is pure Hebrew, 
free from Aramaisms and late forms. Constructions such 



AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 105 

as are found in Kings are not found in Samuel." 1 The 
difficulties are not important, being the adjustment of the 
chronology, the variations between the Hebrew and Greek 
texts, and the apparent discrepancies, as i Sam. 23 : 19 ; 24: 
22, and ch. 26. 

8. Kings. — The two books of Kings (one in Hebrew) 
are a continuation of the history in the books of Samuel. 
The author is not certainly known. Jewish tradition 
names Jeremiah, and the language and style favor the tra- 
dition. Later scholars have conjectured that the author 
was Ezra or Baruch. The writer used existing records, as 
"Acts of Solomon/ ' " Chronicles of the Kings of Judah " 
and " Chronicles of the Kings of Israel " (1 Kings 11 : 41 ; 
14:19, 29). Yet there is a unity, a peculiar plan and 
symmetry of purpose in the books, indicative of a well- 
wrought work, and not a mere compilation. The date can- 
not be earlier than the exile. It probably belongs to the 
last half of the period of the exile. Recent Assyrian dis- 
coveries have thrown much new light upon the various 
dynasties mentioned in the books. The obscurities are not 
many nor important, and scholars have suggested various 
reasonable explanations. These books close the "Earlier 
Prophets' ' of the Hebrew Bible. 

9. Chronicles. — These two books were also originally 
one, and are placed at the end of the Hebrew Bible. The 
Hebrew title is "The Diaries" or "The Affairs of the 
Times." The Septuagint calls them " Paralipotnena" or 
"Things Omitted,' ' under the erroneous idea that they 
were intended to supply omissions in the history in the four 
books of Kings. Jerome named them "Chronicles," and 

1 Prof. O. S. Stearns, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 37. 
7 



106 HISTORICAL (O. T.) BOOKS: 

was followed by Luther and by the English translators. 
Their composition is ascribed to Ezra by Jewish and Chris- 
tian tradition, and in language and style they resemble the 
book of Ezra. The Chronicles are clearly independent 
history, not written to supply omissions in Kings, but to 
give the returned exiles information needful for them in re- 
settling the land of Canaan. The tribal and family de- 
scent would be very important in settling inheritances. 
Critics who wish to fix the composition of the Pentateuch 
after the exile have very sharply, but most unsuccessfully, 
assailed the books of Chronicles. The accounts of the tem- 
ple service, the covenant, the reforms under Josiah and 
Hezekiah, are strong confirmations of the earlier origin of 
the Pentateuch. The date of Chronicles cannot be fixed 
earlier than the restoration from exile ; and as the history 
ends with the decree of Cyrus, that may be assumed as the 
time of their composition. Much of the work is evidently 
based upon existing and apparently official documents. 
For example, the first nine chapters appear to cite tribal 
genealogical records ; and in chaps. 23-26 the priestly 
records seem to be the basis of the history. In fact, eleven 
sources are distinctly named: " the book of Samuel the 
seer," " of Nathan the prophet," " of Gad the seer," "the 
prophecy of Ahijah," "the visions" or "the story" of 
" Iddo the seer against Jeroboam," another by him "con- 
cerning genealogies," "the book of Shemaiah the proph- 
et," "the book of Jehu," "the book of the kings of 
Israel," " the book of the kings of Israel and Judah," and 
a book by Isaiah ; see 1 Chron. 29 : 29 ; 2 Chron. 9 : 29 ; 
12: 15; 13: 22; 16: 11 ; 20: 34; 26 : 22; 27: 7; 32 : 32. 
These numerous references to existing books containing 
more full records of the events very briefly mentioned in 



AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 107 

the Chronicles show how abundant were the written 
sources to which the author had access, and how familiar 
he was with the contents of those original records. They 
tend strongly to confirm the trustworthiness of his 
chronicle ; and this being maintained, the strongest attacks 
of the newer criticism will fall or can be effectively repelled. 

10. Ezra. — This book in the Hebrew Bible is the tenth 
after the Psalms. The Jews (Josephus and the Talmud), 
Origen and Jerome, regard Ezra and Nehemiah as one 
book in two parts. But Nehemiah has its own title in He- 
brew. The two books are called Esdras and Nehemiah 
in the Septuagint, and i and 2 Esdras in the Vulgate. 
Historically Ezra follows close after Chronicles ; hence the 
order in our Bibles is in better accord with the contents 
than the order in Hebrew Bibles. The author, according 
to the Jews, was Ezra. Modern critics admit that he wrote 
a portion, but deem the whole a compilation by some un- 
known though contemporaneous writer. A portion of it is 
written in Chaldee or Aramaic, e. g., chaps. 4 : 8 to 6 : 6 
and 7 : 1-26 ; but these are probably from public records. 
The varying use of the first and third persons in the last 
portion of chaps. 6 to 10 has a parallel in Daniel and Isaiah. 
The writer in the latter case speaks of himself historically ; 
in the former he writes of events which he witnessed. That 
Ezra was the author has been fairly sustained. The date must 
be placed in the fifth century before Christ, in the age of Cy- 
rus, etc., and after Ezra's return to Jerusalem with the exiles. 

11. Nehemiah. — This book is the eleventh in order after 
Psalms in the Hebrew Bible. The author of the first seven 
chapters was surely Nehemiah, for it is so avowed in the 
book itself. The writer of chaps. 8-13 is questioned by 
many, although Keil accepts Nehemiah as their author. 



108 HISTORICAL (O. T.) BOOKS : 

The objections urged against his authorship of this portion 
are that the narrative changes to the third person, and Ne- 
hemiah is spoken of as " Tirshatha" (Neh. 8 : 9), and that 
the name of Jaddua appears as high priest (Neh. 12 : 1- 
26), who lived in the time of Alexander, a century later 
than Nehemiah. But the other portions of chap. 1 2 and 
chap. 13 are usually credited to Nehemiah. The language 
of the book has a strong infusion of Aramaisms and of words 
of Persian origin. After an interval of about twelve years, 
it carries on the history of Ezra for about thirty years, un- 
til the temple of Zerubbabel was rebuilt. It is the latest of 
the historical books of the Old Testament. 

12. Esther. — Historically this book belongs to the 
period of the exiles, previous tp Nehemiah and a portion 
of Ezra. Some regard it as an episode in the history of 
those Israelites that did not return from exile, and an illus- 
tration of their moral decline. The incident related in the 
book of Esther gave rise to the feast of Purim, still cele- 
brated among the Jews. This book is the eighth following 
the Psalms in the Hebrew Bible. It appears to have been 
regarded as an appendix to the history of the exilic period, 
as Ruth was to Judges, and hence in the Septuagint was 
added to Ezra and Nehemiah. It does not contain the 
name of God. Perhaps the name was intentionally 
omitted, so that the book could be read at a joyous 
festival without irreverence. It forcibly illustrates God's 
providence. The author, some say, was Ezra; others say 
Mordecai. The date cannot be definitely stated, although 
the events surely occurred between 480 and 430 B.C. As it 
seems to have been written by an eye-witness, internal evi- 
dence favors Mordecai as author and 480 to 470 B.C. as the 
date. The book contains many Persian words; but the 



AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. 109 

literary character is high, and the style lively. The sum- 
mary execution of Haman and the sudden elevation of 
Mordecai find frequent illustrations in later history of Orien- 
tal courts. 

13. These twelve books of the Old Testament contain 
the richest history of a race. Written by men illumined 
by the Holy Spirit, the grand purposes of God's provi- 
dence are unfolded with marvellous compactness and clear- 
ness. The long succession of bloody struggles, the aston- 
ishing deliverances of God's people, their weak and wicked 
relapses into sin, the glorious power of Jehovah manifested 
to them, and preparing them for the future advent of Mes- 
siah, the promised Redeemer, give diversity and charm to 
the history and instruction to the devout mind. 

Of the purpose and mission of the two Testaments Mr. 
Gladstone says : 

14. General Character. — "As the heavens cover the 
earth from east to west, so the Scripture covers and com- 
prehends the whole field of the destiny of man. The 
whole field is reached by its moral and potential energy, as 
a provision enduring to the end of time. But it is marvel- 
lous to consider how large a portion of it lies directly 
within the domain of the Old Testament. . . . The cor- 
roborative legends of Assyria, ascertained by modern re- 
search, concerning the Creation and the Flood, to which 
we know not what further additions may still progressively 
be made, carry us up, it may be finally said, 

" * To the first syllable of recorded time.' 

" Historic evidence does not warrant our carrying back- 
wards the probable existence of the Adamic race for more 
than some such epoch as from 4000 to 6000 years anterior 



110 HISTORICAL (O. T.) BOOKS: 

to the advent of Christ. And if, as appears likely, the 
Creation story has come down from the beginning, the 
Christian may feel a lively interest in observing that, for by 
far the larger portion of human history, the refreshing rain 
of divine inspiration has descended, with comparatively 
short intervals, from heaven upon earth, and the records 
of it have been collected and preserved in the Sacred Vol- 
ume. Apart from every question of literary form and of 
detail, we now trace the probable origins of our Sacred 
Books far back beyond Moses and his time. And so we 
have a marvellous picture presented to us, not only all-pre- 
vailing for the imagination and the heart of man, but as I 
suppose quite unexampled in its historical appeal to the hu- 
man intelligence. The whole human record is covered and 
bound together in that same unwearied and inviolable con- 
tinuity, which weaves into a tissue the six Mosaic days of 
gradually advancing creations, and fastens them on at the 
hither end to the advancing stages of Adamic, and, in due 
course, of subsequent history. 

"We find then that, apart from the question of moral 
purity and elevation, the Scriptures of the Old Testament 
appear to be distinguished from the sacred books possessed 
by various nations in several vital particulars. They deal 
with the Adamic race as a whole. They begin with the 
preparation of the earth for the habitation and use of man. 
They then, from his first origin, draw downwards a thread 
of personal history. This thread is enlarged into a web as, 
from being personal, the narrative becomes national, and 
eventually includes the whole race of man. They are not 
given once for all, as by Confucius or Zoroaster in their 
respective spheres ; they do not deliver a mere code of 
morals or of legislation, but they purport to disclose a close 



AUTHORSHIP AND COMPOSITION. Ill 

and continuing superintendence from on high over human 
affairs. And the whole is doubly woven into one : first, by 
a chain of divine action, and of human instructors acting 
under divine authority, which is never broken until the 
time when political servitude, like another Egyptian cap- 
tivity, has become the appointed destiny of the nation ; 
secondly, by the Messianic bond, by the light of prophecy 
shining in a dark place, and directing onwards the minds 
of devout men to the "fulness of time M and the birth of 
the wondrous Child, so as effectually to link the old sacred 
books to the dispensation of the Advent, and to carry for- 
ward their office until the final day of doom. May it not 
boldly be asked, what parallel to such an outline as this can 
be supplied by any of the sacred books preserved among 
any other of the races of the world ? So far, then, the 
office and work of the Old Testament, as presented to us 
by its own contents, is without a compeer among the old 
religions. It deals with the case of man as a whole. . . . 
It is a history of sin, and of redemption." 



CHAPTER XL 

HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 

i. The Oriental mind delights in figures, metaphors and 
in brilliantly-imaginative forms of speech. The Hebrews 
were also in surroundings exceedingly favorable for sub- 
lime poetic creations. Poetry was their delight from the 
earliest beginnings of their history. More than one-third 
of the entire Old Testament is poetry. Its poetry is among 
the oldest, the purest and the most sublime in the world. 
It is fitted to stir the deepest spiritual nature of man in all 
ages. In other languages much of the poetry relates to 
the temporal interests of the people; Hebrew poetry is 
truly the daughter of religion. 

2. Forms of Hebrew Poetry. — Strictly there is neither 
epic nor dramatic poetry in Hebrew. The reason is ob- 
vious. Epic poetry springs from an effort to glorify human 
greatness — the heroic in man ; the Hebrew was taught to 
glorify God. Hebrew poetry is almost wholly lyric and 
didactic, and some add also gnomic. There are no lyrics 
in the world comparable with the Psalms of David, no 
gnomic poetry equal to the Proverbs, and no didactic poem 
so perfect in form, so profound and majestic in thought or 
so exalted and spiritual in conception as the book of Job. 

3. Rhyme and metre, common in modern poetry, are 
seldom found in Hebrew. Josephus tried to find hexame- 
ters in the songs of Ex. 15 and Deut. 32, and trimeters or 

(112) 






HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 113 

pentameters in the Psalms. Eusebius sought an heroic 
measure of sixteen syllables; while Jerome represented 
Job as written in dactyls and spondees, comparing Hebrew 
poetry with the Greek poems of Pindar, Aleseus and Sap- 
pho. Later scholars, as Sir W. Jones, Grove and Saal- 
chiitz, have applied similar rules ; but no such system of 
metres can be found in Hebrew on any method of vocal- 
izing now known, nor without destroying the Massoretic 
pointing. Bickeli would make it conform to the Syriac, 
which is plausible, but has not found much favor with 
scholars. 

4. Parallelisms, — Hebrew poetry, as Lowth and others 
have shown, consists chiefly of parallelisms and a certain 
swing and balance in their sentences which give an inde- 
scribable charm to their poetic compositions. 

The parallelisms in Hebrew have been roughly divided 
into three kinds: (i) Synonymous, that is, where each line 
of the distich or tristich has the same thought, but in 
varied expression ; (2) Antithetic, where the thought of the 
second member of the parallelism is in contrast with that 
of the first ; and (3) Synthetic, where the thought is cumu- 
lative upon the same topic. 

5. Alliteration and assonance are frequently used in 
Hebrew poetry, and rhyme occasionally, but the latter 
seldom runs beyond two or three lines. 

The Hebrew poetic writers delighted in the older and 
sometimes the fuller forms of words. They use not the 
learned or artificial, but the simpler and more archaic 
speech, giving strength and music to the movement of their 
sentences. 

6. Poetic Books. — There are five so-called poetical books 
in the Old Testament : Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 



114 HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 

and Song of Solomon. But beside these, large portions 
of other books are in poetic language. All the prophetical 
books except Daniel are poetry. The girls of Shiloh sang 
as they gathered grapes ; the maidens of Gilead chanted 
the story of Jephthah's daughter; the boys learned David's 
song of lament over Jonathan, and hunters and shepherds 
vvhiled away the tediousness of the hunt and watch, by 
songs and the flute. 1 

7. Early Songs. — The earliest specimen of poetry in the 
Old Testament is Lamech's Sword Song. Some of the 
most noted of Hebrew songs, outside the poetical books, 
are those of Moses and Miriam, of Balaam, Deborah and 
Hannah. The following list, though incomplete, will be 
helpful to the student : 

Lamech's Sword Song Gen. 4 : 23, 24. 

Noah's Song Gen. 9 : 25-27. 

About Rebekah Gen. 25 : 23. 

Isaac's Blessings Gen. 27 : 27-29, 39, 40. 

Jacob's Farewell Gen. 49 : 2-27. 

Moses' and Miriam's Song. . . .Ex. 15 ; 1-19, 21. 

War Songs, etc Num. 21 : 14, 15, 17, 18, 27-30. 

Balaam's Prophecies Num. 23 : 7-10, 18-24; 24 : 3-9, 15-24. 

Moses' Prophetic Song Deut. 32 : 1-43. 

Moses' Blessing Deut. 33 : 2-29. 

Joshua to the Sun Josh. 10 : 12, 13. 

Song of Deborah and Barak. Judg. 5 : 2-21. 

Samson's Riddle Song Judg. 15 : 16. 

Hannah's Magnificat 1 Sam. 2 : 1-10. 

David's Song of the Bow. . . .2 Sam. 1 : 19-27. 

David's Song over Abner 2 Sam. 3 : 33, 34. 

David's Deliverance 2 Sam. 22 : 2-51 (cf. Ps. 18). 

David's Last Words 2 Sam. 23 : 1-7. 

David's Thanksgiving 1 Chron. 16 : 8-36. 

1 See Reuss, Hebrew poetry* If erzog's Enc. 



HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 115 

Hezekiah's Song Isa. 38 : 10-20. 

Jonah's Prayer Song Jonah 2 : 2-9. 

Habakkuk's Prayer Song.. . . .Hab. 3 : 2-19. 

There are four original songs in the New Testament cast 
in the spirit of Hebrew poetry : 

Magnificat.. Luke 1 : 46-55. 

Benedictus Luke I : 68-80. 

Gloria in Excelsis Luke 2:14. 

Nunc Dimittis Luke 2 : 29-33. 

8. The Psalms. — The book of Psalms in the Hebrew Bible 
was the first of the KHhubim, or " Writings. 1 ' The Psalms, 
Proverbs and Job were regarded as pre-eminently poetical 
books, and the Massorites distinguished them by a peculiar 
accentuation. The Psalms were called " Sepher T'/ie/im," 
or "Book of Praises." The Greeks called it " Psalmos" 
from which the English "Psalms" is derived. 

9. Groups of Psalms. — The Psalms are counted as one 
book, but in the Hebrew Bible are divided into five collec- 
tions, rather inaptly termed "books" in the Revised 
English Version. 

The end of each of the first four " books " is indicated 
by a doxology. 

The books are: (I.) Ps. 1-41 ; (II.) Ps. 42-72; (III.) 
Ps. 73-89; (IV.) Ps. 90-106; (V.) Ps. 107-150. The 
topics of the Psalms have been compared to an oratorio in 
five parts : (1) Decline of man ; (2) Revival ; (3) Plaintive 
complaint ; (4) Response to the complaint ; (5) Final 
thanksgiving and triumph. 

This five-fold division of the Psalms is very ancient, 
but when or by whom it was made is uncertain. Some 
ascribe it to Nehemiah or his time ; it certainly is two or 



116 HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 

three centuries older than the Christian era. The division 
appears in the Septuagint. Why it was made is not clear. 
Some conjecture that it was in accord with the supposed 
chronological order of the Psalms, or was an arrangement 
according to authors, topics, or for liturgical use. The col- 
lection could not have been completed before the time of 
Ezra. About fifty Psalms are quoted in the New Testament. 

10. Authors. — The titles or inscriptions of the Psalms are 
not by the original authors, but belong to an early age. 
They are attached to 101 psalms. The 49 not having titles, 
the Talmud calls "Orphan Psalms.' ' According to these 
titles, 73 psalms are ascribed to David, 1 12 to Asaph one 
of David's singers, 12 to the sons of Korah 2 a priestly 
family of singers of David's time, 2 (72d and 127th) to 
Solomon, 1 (90th) to Moses, and 1 (89th) to Ethan. 
The other 49 are anonymous. But the Septuagint assigns 
the 127th to Jeremiah, the 146th to Haggai, and the 147th 
to Zechariah. It is worthy of note that the great Hallel 
songs, Ps. 115-118, and the famous alphabetic hymn, the 
119th, are among the anonymous songs. 

1 1 . Classification of Songs. — The most ancient classification, 
aside from the division into five collections, is also found 
in the titles. The meaning of these is obscure. Some are 
termed Shir, a solo for the voice ; Afizmor, song of praise 
accompanied with an instrument ; Maschil, ode or didactic 
song ; Michtam, a catch-word poem (Delitzsch) ; Shiggaion, 
an excited ode; Thephillah, a prayer-song; Shir jeaidoth, 



1 The Septuagint ascribes 85 psalms to David. The New Testament 
cites Pss. 2 and 95 as his. This reduces the number by anonymous 
writers to 34. But Delitzsch thinks only 50 can be defended as David's 
from internal evidence. 

2 If, however, Ps. 88 is ascribed to Hernan, as some render the title, 
then only j 1 were by the sons of Korah, 



HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 117 

a song of loves; Shir hamma 'a loth, a song of ascent or 
pilgrim songs; Kinah, dirge or elegy. Modern groups 
are based upon the contents, as seven (some say eight) 
penitential (6th, 25th, 32d [38th], 51st, io2d, 130th, 143d), 
seven imprecatory psalms (35th, S2d, 58th, 59th, 69th, 
109th, 137th), pilgrim songs, psalms of thanksgiving, of 
adoration, of faith and hope, Messianic psalms, and historic 
psalms. 

Some psalms have parallelisms or longer stanzas, each 
beginning with an initial letter corresponding to the twenty- 
two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. There are seven of 
these alphabetic psalms and five other alphabetic poems 
in the Old Testament. Some psalms are choral, as 24th, 
115th, 135th ; some gradational, as 121st, 124th. Of the 
psalms ascribed to David, several have Chaldaic or Aramaic 
forms that betray a later author. 

12. Proverbs. — The Hebrew title to this book is Mishle 
Sh'/omo, " Proverbs of Solomon/' so called from the in- 
troductory words. The Hebrew word for proverbs is used 
in a variety of meanings, as pithy saying, parable, aphorism 
or maxim, and for more extended illustration. (See Micah 
2:4; Hab. 2 : 6 ; 1 Sam. 10 : 12 ; Prov. 1:1; Eccles. 12 : 
9 ; and Num. 23 : 7-10.) The soul of a proverb is brevity 
and great wisdom. It condenses the result of a life of wise 
observation and varied experience into a few words, a single 
parallelism. With Orientals it was and is popular, because 
easily remembered. Secular literature has several collec- 
tions of proverbs, as the " Sayings of the Seven Wise Men 
of Greece," the " Golden Songs ascribed to Pythagoras/' 
and Arabic proverbs. But the Proverbs of the Bible are 
unequalled in wit and wisdom. They abound in polished 
and sparkling gems of wisdom, bearing the stamp of in- 



118 HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 

spiration (Prov. i : 7). The Proverbs are divided into 
seven parts: (1) chap. 1 : 1-6; (2) 1 : 7 to chap. 9; (3) 
chaps. 10 to 22 : 16; (4) 22 : 17 to chap. 24; (5) chaps. 25 
to 29 ; (6) chap. 30 to 31 : 9 ; (7) chap. 31 : 10-31. 

13. Authors of Proverbs. — The Proverbs are ascribed to 
Solomon, 1 and it is clear he wrote or compiled the most of 
them. Yet there were several other authors of the latter 
portion, as the men of Hezekiah, Agur, Lemuel. (See 
Prov. 1 : 1 ; 10 : 1 ; 25 : 1 ; 30 : 1 ; 31 : 1.) 

14. The date of the complete collection is certainly not 
older than Hezekiah, though the greater portion was in ex- 
istence from the time of Solomon. 

15. The Structure is that of poetic parallelisms, in lines 
of single, double, triple or more couplets. The sense or 
thought is usually either synonymous or antithetic in these 
couplets. For example — 

" Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, 
And the man that getteth understanding " (3 : 13), 

is synonymous in thought. 

" A wise son maketh a glad father: 
But a foolish son is the heaviness [grief] of his mother" (10: 1), 

is an antithetic parallelism. 

"Asa bird that wandereth from her nest, 
So is a man that wandereth from his place " (27 : 8), 

is an instance of simple comparison. 

" Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler; 
And whosoever erreth [reeleth] thereby is not wise " (20 : 1), 

1 There is a Jewish tradition that Solomon composed the Song of 
Songs in his youth, Proverbs in mature manhood, and Ecclesiastes in 
his old age. 



HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 119 

is an example of amplification of thought, containing a 
reason for the warning. (See also 3:3; 27 : 10.) 

The book of Proverbs is the storehouse whence all Chris- 
tians and some heathen peoples have drawn practical wis- 
dom, and it teaches that the true source of wisdom is Je- 
hovah. 

16. Job. — This book is so named not as indicating the 
author, but the hero. 

Author. — The book itself does not indicate the author. 
The Jews and early Christian writers ascribed it to Moses. 
He was well fitted to write such a work, and in Midian 
would be wont to meditate on such a theme. The contents 
in the main indicate that it was written before the priest- 
hood, ceremonial worship and law were instituted. Some 
say the writer was Job. Later scholars ascribe it to the age 
of Solomon, chiefly on the ground that the artistic structure 
presupposes higher training than the Mosaic period, and 
that there are some Aramaisms and allusions to the Mosaic 
law. Advanced critics would assign it to the exilic age, 
depending mainly on the linguistic peculiarities to support 
their view. Proofs from recent discoveries have appeared 
of an exceeding high state of art and knowledge existing 
in Assyria and in Egypt earlier than the Mosaic era, weak- 
ening the argument for a late origin. The Aramaisms may 
be accounted for on the view that the book was written in 
Edom, Arabia or the Euphrates valley, and the supposed 
allusions to the Mosaic law are obscure, probably only co- 
incidences of thought. The language fits the eastern re- 
gion. Compare Moabite Stone inscription. The date of 
the book depends upon the authorship. 

17. The Structure of Job. — It is a didactic, almost dra- 
matic, poem, in five parts. It might be counted a drama 



120 HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 






of life, a tragedy with a happy and not a tragic end. The 
dramatis persona or characters are Jehovah, Satan, Job, 
Job's wife and his children, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar and 
Elihu. The five parts are: (i) Prologue (chaps, i, 2); (2) 
Interviews with three friends (3-32); (3) with Elihu (32- 
38); (4) with Jehovah (38-41 ,; (5) Job's submission (41,42). 

18. The object of the book is not to solve the problem of 
evil, though it throws some side light upon it. It shows 
that all calamities do not come as judgments for sin. It 
teaches the doctrine of a future life. The main object is 
indicated by the prologue and the tart question of Satan, 
" Doth Job serve God for naught ? " The chief purpose of 
the book is to show that true religion does not spring from 
any form of selfishness. It also shows the rectitude of the 
divine government when the righteous are afflicted. Spe- 
cial trials do not imply special guilt. They may exhibit 
God's benevolent design toward the sufferer, and they are 
intended to beget submission to God's holy will. 

19. Is the Book History ? — This is answered yes, strictly 
so, by Josephus, Jewish rabbins and early Christian writers. 
Some modern critics say decisively no, but a mere poetic 
creation. The more reverent, thoughtful scholars accept 
it as based on historical facts, embellished or draped by 
rich Oriental figures and inspired poetic descriptions. Job 
was an historic person (Ezek. 14: 14, 20; James 5 : 11), 
eminent for faith and piety. The trials were real, the 
Satanic influence, the losses, the complaints, the restoration, 
were all historical, we may well believe. The construction 
of the poem, the order and forms of the thought are 
wrought out by the inspired poet, so as to show how human 
history is related to the divine purposes, for the comfort 
and instruction of suffering humanity in all ages. 



Hebrew poetry akd poetical books. 121 

20. Ecclesiastes. — This is the seventh book following the 
Psalms in the Hebrew Scriptures, where it is called Kohe- 
leth. It is a didactic poem, teaching that to obey God is 
the sutnmum bonum, the highest good. In a series of poetic 
soliloquies the writer depicts the vanities of earthly things, 
and the eternal verities above the sun. It represents a soul 
perplexed and tinged with scepticism, in the spirit of mod- 
erate Hebrew faith reaching out after Jehovah and eternal 
blessedness. 

21. The author y according to the general belief of Jews 
and Christians, was Solomon. It is not widely inconsistent 
with his age, knowledge, experience and language. The 
Aramaisms are not numerous, and he might acquire them 
from familiarity with foreign nations. Some modern 
scholars (as Ewald, Delitzsch and Ginsburg) suppose the 
author was of the exilic or post-exilic age, and personated 
Solomon. But Pusey, Tayler Lewis, Dean Milman and 
others maintain that it belongs to the age of Solomon. It 
gives the impressions of one who has had a long life of 
broad observation and of great folly. It must be admitted 
that the arguments against its Solomonic authorship are 
weighty, but the difficulties in the way of the later theory 
are also great. 

22. The Song 0/ Songs. — This is the Hebrew name of the 
fourth book after the Psalms. It means the most beautiful 
of songs, " which is Solomon's.' ' It appears as a remark- 
able cantata in five parts : a drama celebrating the excel- 
lence and purity of true wedded love. 

23. The author was almost universally conceded to be 
Solomon until the last century. This was based on the title 
to the book itself, the evident knowledge of Solomon, his 
reign and royalty. The linguistic forms found in it appear 

8 



122 HEBREW POETRY AND POETICAL BOOKS. 

also in the song of Deborah, in Job and in Amos. Those 
who deny that it was written by Solomon rely largely upon 
the internal and linguistic evidences to support their view. 
The book illustrates what is said of Solomon in i Kings, 
4 : 33, and describes a regal state and glory which was true 
in the reign of Solomon. 

24. The structure is variously defined. Some hold that 
it is an antiphonal song between two lovers, attended by a 
chorus ; the Shulamite a shepherdess, and a shepherd her 
royal lover; that it describes (1) mutual love, (2) lovers 
seeking and finding each other, (3) the marriage, (4) a 
separation and return, (5) praises of lovers and love. 

25. Interpretations have been many, chiefly along three 
lines: (1) allegorical, full of fancies of every sort; (2) 
the literal, a poetic representation of pure love; (3) the 
typical, that it represents the Church and Christ as her 
spotless Husband. Whatever may be the spiritual lessons 
that it illustrates, it graphically shows the Hebrew idea of 
true bridal and conjugal love. It is aromatic with the 
fragrance of spring flowers, singing birds, and the charms 
of a sweet and strong love. It is fitting that one book of 
Scriptures should breathe the joy, peace and beauty that 
spring from domestic life of human love, a symbol and 
reflex of that divine love Christ has for His people. 

The prophecies, which are also poetry, must be treated 
tinder Prophetical Books. 



CHAPTER XII. 

PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 

i. The Prophets were a large class of religious teachers 
among the Hebrews. Many of them were inspired to in- 
terpret and declare the will of God to the people. Prophet, 
in the popular sense, means a person inspired to fore- 
tell future events. This was not the chief work of the He- 
brew prophets ; but it was to act as divinely authorized 
teachers of religion and of spiritual truth. It also desig- 
nated one who recorded such teachings or prophecies. 
Moses was a prophet, and prophets existed from the earliest 
period. 

Later, the schools of the Hebrew prophets sprang up in 
the time of Samuel. They were a professional class. 
Many of this class were not divinely inspired or authorized, 
but were false prophets (Jer. 14: 14; 23 : 21 ; Ezek.13: 
2; 22:28; Micah 9:11). True prophets were often 
called from outside of the professional class to declare the 
word of the Lord and to interpret his dealings with the 
Hebrew and other nations. They were even authorized to 
denounce the professional prophets for false teachings. 

2. The Great Work of the true prophets may be divided 
into five historical periods or crises : — (1) To unify the 
nation in the age of Samuel ; (2) To suppress Baal-worship 
and the worship of strange gods in the time of Elijah and 
Plisha; (3) To teach that righteousness was required to re- 

(123) 



124 PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 

tain God's favor, under Amos and the shepherd prophets; 

(4) That Israel was spared to secure a holy people for the 
Messiah, as in the age of Isaiah and his contemporaries ; 

(5) That God wanted reformation of the heart, and not 
merely of outward national or personal manners, as in the 
age of Jeremiah to Malachi. The nation might be de- 
stroyed, but Jehovah still desired personal holiness and 
purity of heart. 

3. Prophetical Books. — The great mass of the prophetic 
instructions to the Hebrew people has been lost. That 
which has been preserved may, however, contain the sub- 
stance of the divine messages for more than a thousand 
years. The books which the Hebrews called the " Earlier 
Prophets'' have already been considered. There remain 
sixteen books, which they called the "Later Prophets'' 
(excepting Daniel), 1 and that are pre-eminently prophetical 
books. The prophecies in these books, except Daniel, 
Jonah, Haggai and some of Malachi, are poetry or poetic 
in form. Portions of them are among the finest lyrics in 
the language, as the prayer of Habakkuk, the Lamentations 
of Jeremiah, and the Messianic odes in the 5 2d and 53d 
chapters of Isaiah. 

4. Division. — The sixteen prophetic books are divided 
into four Major or greater, and twelve Minor or lesser, 
prophets. The Major or greater, were not so called from 
any belief that they were greater in character or in impor- 
tance, but simply because the length of their recorded 
prophecies was greater than those called Minor or lesser. 

The prophetic books may also be grouped in periods, as 
— (1) Before the great captivity, Jonah, Joel, Amos, Hosea, 

1 Daniel was placed among the KHhubim, or " Writings," and in 
order ranked ninth after the Psalms. 



PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 125 

Micah, Nahum, Zephaniah, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Habak- 
kuk. (2) During the captivity, Daniel, Ezekiel and Oba- 
diah (?). (3) After the captivity, Haggai, Zechariah 
and Malachi. It will be convenient briefly to notice the 
books in the order in which they are found in the 
English Bibles. 

5. Isaiah. — The title means "Salvation of Jehovah/' 
The prophecies recorded under his name rank second in 
quantity, being exceeded only by those of Jeremiah. The 
latter has about one-tenth more matter than Isaiah. 

Author. — Jewish and Christian tradition, the apocryphal 
Old Testament books, Ecclus. 48 : 24, 25, and Josephus, 
say the book was by the prophet Isaiah. The work is quoted 
in the New Testament as by Isaiah about 120 times, the 
quotations being about equally divided between the earlier 
and later prophecies. The style is conceded to be similar 
by all competent critics ; technical expressions and hymns 
are common to both and peculiar. But Ewald assigned the 
book to seven authors ; some modern critics to many more. 
Others say there were two, the first and a "pseudo " or 
"deutero" Isaiah. Against the unity of authorship, it is 
asserted that the writer of chapters 40 to 66 describes his 
own cities in rain, and therefore lived after the Babylonian 
captivity, about 150 years after Isaiah's death; that he 
names the future deliverer, Cyrus, and so wrote post even- 
turn; that prophets did not usually " project themselves 
into a distant future, filling their pages with details of that 
future." This proves too much. To say that Isaiah could 
not write prophecy which would prove to be true history, is 
to deny all prophecy. Who was the " great unknown? " 
This question is unsolved. There is no trace of him in 
Hebrew history or tradition. The book is conceded to be 



126 PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 

Scripture. It is the nature of prophecy to look into the 
future as if it were present. Surely the description of the 
servant of God who suffers and dies for the sins of his 
people as described in the 53d chapter, fits no other per- 
son in history as it does Jesus Christ. It is then, not very 
material to the divine character of this prophecy whether 
it was spoken 750 or 450 years before Christ. Whoever 
the author or authors, it was inspired of God and is of di- 
vine authority. 

The Structure. — It consists of a series of predictions 
expressed with an unction, pathos, holy rapture and poetic 
majesty unequalled in literature. The prophecies, which 
are poetry, are connected by narrative in prose. The con- 
tents centre about three leading topics, — redemption prom- 
ised, redemption provided, redemption accomplished. 

6. Jeremiah. — These prophecies were spoken by the son 
of Hilkiah, of a priestly family of Anathoth, a small town 
about three miles northeast of Jerusalem. His prophecies 
extended over about forty years, and relate to the southern 
kingdom of Judah from the period of Josiah to Zedekiah 
(621 to about 585 b. a). The author of the book is held 
to be Jeremiah himself, though he dictated portions of it 
to Baruch the scribe, who wrote it out. (Jer. 36 : 4 ; 45 : 1.) 
The last chapter appears to be an appendix, probably by 
another prophetic author. 

The structure is simple and rugged. Jeremiah is a bold 
preacher of righteousness to a sinning people. Some have 
likened him to Dante proclaiming coming judgments, and 
to the Trojan Cassandra. He is the poet of desolation and 
sorrow, with here and there gleams of light amid the gen- 
eral blackness of the storm. Portions of the book were 
intended to instruct and comfort the Jewish captives at 






PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 127 

Babylon, and later portions were warnings to foreign na- 
tions. 

7. Lamentations, by the same prophet, were called 
Echoh ("How?") in Hebrew. It is composed of five 
pathetic elegies lamenting over the destruction of Judah 
and Jerusalem by the Chaldaeans. The five are parts of 
one great theme. The first two poems are alphabetic. They 
consist of twenty-two stanzas, each beginning with a letter 
of the Hebrew alphabet. The third chapter has sixty-six 
verses, the first three beginning with the first letter of the 
Hebrew alphabet, and the second three with the second 
letter, and so on to the end. The fourth chapter is ar- 
ranged similar to the first and second, except that the verses 
have two clauses each. 

8. Ezekiel. — His name means " God strengthens.' ' He 
was of a priestly family, and a prophet during the Baby- 
lonian exile. He lived in captivity at Tel-Abib, on the 
banks of the river Chebar, about two hundred miles north 
of Babylon. The book of his prophecy is diffuse, artistic, 
and abounds in allegory, symbols and obscurity. Its diffi- 
culties caused the Jews to declare that no one should read 
it until thirty years of age. Jerome called it " an ocean 
and labyrinth of the mysteries of God." But the difficul- 
ties are chiefly those of exposition. 

The methods of interpretation applied to Ezekiel may 
be designated as four: — (i) Allegorical, dangerous in ten- 
dency; (2) historical, essentially destructive; (3) symbolical, 
requires careful and guarded qualifications ; (4) typical, the 
more safe method. 1 

9. Daniel is not placed among the prophetical books 

1 See Stearns, Intro. Books of O. T., 1889. 



128 PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 

in the Hebrew Bible, but with the K'thubim, being the 
ninth book after the Psalms. Various reasons have been 
offered to explain this, but the real ground is not known. 

Author. — The book itself implies that it was written by 
Daniel, the prophet of the captivity. This is the testi- 
mony of i Mace, i : 54; 2 : 59, 60, confirmed by the book 
of Baruch and the references in the New Testament. Jo- 
sephus also states the current belief of his time that it was 
by Daniel, "one of the greatest of the prophets." {Jew. 
Wars, 6:2, 1 ; Antiq.> 11:8, 5.) Some modern critics 
ascribe it to a pseudo Daniel of the Maccabaean age. They 
urge that it was not among prophetical books ; is written 
partly in Aramaic ; is not mentioned in Ecclus. 49, which 
notices some great prophets. But that also omits Ezra and 
Mordecai and the twelve Minor prophets (for 49 : 10 is 
regarded as spurious). Many of the historical difficulties 
have been removed by late discoveries in the Euphrates 
valley. The objection to Daniel as the author, sprang at 
first largely from a wish to get rid of the miracles and 
prophecies it contains. The testimony continues too 
strong for the severest criticism seriously to weaken. The 
unity of the book is generally conceded. 

In structure it is complex, partly history and partly 
prophecy. This may account for its position in the Hebrew 
Bible. Chapters 2 : 4 to 7 are in Aramaic ; the other por- 
tions in Hebrew. The introduction and the Aramaic por- 
tion are written in the third person. This may be ac- 
counted for by the change in the matter ; the former is his- 
tory, the latter prophetic vision. 

In interpreting the prophetical portion of the book, 
the first empire is generally agreed to be the Babylonian, 
but as to the other three, some combine the Medes and 






PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 129 

Persians into one, while some divide them. Others regard 
the prophecy as covering a wide sweep of the World- 
empires before and after Christ. 

10. The Minor Prophets. — These twelve books are 
counted one in the Hebrew Bible. The order there is the 
same as in English Bibles. The Septuagint changes the or- 
der of the first six thus, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Oba- 
diah, Jonah. Among the twelve are the earliest and the 
latest of the prophetic books. They exhibit wide diversi- 
ties of style, thought and illustration. Here is the uncul- 
tured herdman Amos, the erratic, passionate Jonah, the 
finished and elegant poet Habakkuk, and the cultured and 
graceful Joel. 

n. — Hosea means the same as Jehoshua, " salvation. " 
Stanley calls him the Jeremiah of the northern kingdom (Is- 
rael). His prophetic work covered at least fifty (some say 
seventy) years. 1 His style is sententious and concise, his 
language original and often quaint. Of the several modes of 
interpretation, there are — (i) The literal or modified literal, 
that the prophet actually married a profligate woman, or one 
that became profligate ; (2) That it was a vision which the 
prophet describes ; (3) That typically he states the relation 
of Israel to Jehovah as that of an unfaithful wife to a hus- 
band. There are several references to this book in the New 
Testament. See Matt. 2:15; 9:13; 12:7; Rom. 9 : 
25, 26. 

12. Joel is pure Hebrew, easy-flowing, elegant and clas- 
sical in style, having bold, sublime imagery, vividness and 
power of description, bearing the impress of high culture. 
All these point to an early period of the monarchy as its 

1 See Pusey, Minor Prophets. 



130 PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 

date — not later than 800 B.C. Peter cites a prediction 
of Joel as fulfilled in the Pentecostal revival and gift 
of the Holy Spirit. Compare Joel 2 : 28-32 with Acts 2 : 
16-21. 

13. — Amos was aherdman of Tekoa, a small town about 
twelve miles south of Jerusalem. His name means "bur- 
den" or " burdensome.' ' His style is in strong contrast 
with that of Joel, and yet it charms the reader by a cer- 
tain rugged simplicity and even sublimity and freshness, 
with imagery fragrant of the pasture and rural scenes. 
The date of the prophecies and of the book probably 
follows that of Joel (about 810 to 780 B.C.). An old tra- 
dition, not very trustworthy, declares that he died a mar- 
tyr's death. 

14. Obadiah. — The smallest of the prophetic books re- 
minds the reader of the old feud between Jacob and Esau. 
It is a sweeping declaration of judgment against Edom for 
its unnatural conduct toward Judah in its day of misfortune. 
The date is uncertain. It turns on vs. n-14. Someplace 
it in 889-884 B.C. ; others 606-588 B.C. or later. There is 
a strong resemblance in this book to Jer. 49 : 7-21, where 
there is a similar prophecy against Edom. 

15. Jonah was of Gath-hepher, a town of northern Pal- 
estine between Nazareth and Tiberias. The book is a sim- 
ple, natural and graphic story, bearing the marks of true 
history unless the reader discards miracles. The miracle 
of the "great fish" (it does not say "whale") has been 
made the butt of ridicule by sceptics since the days of 
Julian the Apostate. As a type of Christ, the narrative of 
Jonah must include the miracle of the fish, and Christ him- 
self points to it as such a type. (Matt. 12 : 39-41 ; Luke 
11 : 29-32.) The book reads like history. It may be de- 



PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 131 

nied a historic character, but only "on the ground that all 
records of the supernatural are unhistoric." 1 

1 6. Micah was a prophet of the Mediterranean plains 
near Gath. He is generally assigned to a period between 
758 and 698 B.C. ; but some, depending on internal evi- 
dence, regard this as rather too early, and would place him 
as contemporary with Isaiah. His style is bold, energetic, 
sometimes vehement and abrupt. He abounds in images, 
and his sudden transitions and conciseness make his mean- 
ing often obscure. He was counted a Messianic prophet, 
and his predictions are caught up and echoed in the Song 
of Zacharias (Luke 1:72, 73), and by the chief priests of 
Jerusalem (Matt. 2:5,6). 

17. Nahum is a poetic book of great sublimity and with a 
beautiful imagery. Says Professor Edwards, " In grandeur 
of style, in condensed energy, in elevation of sentiment 
and rapid transitions, and in a certain completeness of rep- 
resentation, Nahum stands, if not the first, yet near the 
first, of the Hebrew prophets/ ■ The writer was probably 
of Galilee, though some have thought he was from the 
valley of the Tigris. He gives a sublime picture of the 
invasion of foes and the desolation of Nineveh. 

18. Habakkuk. — His name means "embracing." He 
was a Levite, but from whence he came and where he lived 
are unknown. The theme of the book is the overthrow of 
Judaea by the Chaldaeans, and then the overthrow of the 
Chaldseans. The style is strong and the thoughts original. 
Ewald says that he "is master of a beautiful style, of pow- 
erful description, and an artistic power that enlivens and 
orders everything with charming effect." Of his eloquent 

1 Prof. Barrows, Intro. Study of the Bible, London, p. 274. 



132 PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 

and sublime prayer-song (chapter 3), upon the majesty of 
Jehovah, Bishop Lowth says : " This anthem is unequalled 
in majesty and splendor of language and imagery.' ' From 
this book Paul cites the famous text " the just shall live by 
his faith" (Hab. 2:4; Rom. 1:17), which was caught up 
by Luther and became the ringing watchword of the great 
Reformation. 

19. — Zephaniah, according to the heading of the book, 
belonged to the period of the great revival under Josiah, 
641-610 B.C. It has been called the great judgment hymn. 
That marvellous description beginning " The great day of 
Jehovah is near, . . . That day ... of wrath M (Zeph. 
1 : 14, 15), furnished the keynote to that sublime Latin 
hymn ascribed to Thomas of Celano (1250), Dies irce, dies 
ilia, esteemed the grandest hymn of the middle ages — a 
hymn more frequently translated than any other, yet never 
equalled, and which brings before us, with thrilling power, 
the final judgment as an awful impending reality. 1 

20. Haggai, a prophet of the restoration. His book is 
plain prose, in a series of four or five discourses. It re- 
lates to the repair of the Temple, 1 : 1-12; 2 : 10-20; to 
the glory of the second temple, 2 : 1-9, and Zerubbabel's 
triumph over his enemies, 2 : 20-23. The second chapter 
contains a distinct reference to Christ as the "desire of 
all nations; " or, "the desirable things of all nations." 
(Hag. 2 : 7.) 

21. Zechariah is accounted the second in order and the 
greatest prophet of the restoration. The thought is essen- 
tially Messianic throughout the book. The theme is one, 
but under two (some say five or six; heads. The authorship 

1 See Schaff, Dictionary of the Bible, p. 915. 



PROPHECY AND PROPHETICAL BOOKS. 133 

has been sharply questioned, some ascribing it to Jeremiah, 
because of the passage in Matt. 27 : 9, 10; but lately this 
theory has been virtually abandoned. Others would sepa- 
rate the book into many sections of different ages ; but the 
authority and inspiration of the book are admitted by all 
reverent scholars. Testimony is strong in favor of the 
unity of authorship. The Septuagint credits it to Zechariah. 
Christ and the New Testament writers recognize but one 
author for it. The book has six specific references to 
Christ — Zech. 3:8; 6:12; 9:9; 11:12; 12: 10; 13: 7. 
22. Malachi, meaning " my messenger," is the closing 
prophet of the Old Testament. The book " is broken up 
into Socratic aphorisms, abounds in ellipses, is crisp and 
terse.' ' It is bold and denunciatory in its messages, yet 
consoles the believer by rich Messianic promises. It dis- 
tinctly foretells that Elijah will come as the forerunner of 
the Messiah. Should the forerunner not come, or fail in 
his mission, the prophet threatens that Jehovah will come 
and "smite the earth with a curse.' ' And thus prophecy 
in the Old Testament closes with a terrific warning, await- 
ing the opening of the New Testament with an angelic 
song, the Gloria in Execlsis. 



¥7$ 






> 

» 






.) ! » ) 






> > > 



> > > 

» 

■>> 

> > ) » 

^>} >:» 

; V 

^ 2> >. 

' > > 



» 

>> 
» 
> > 

>> 

» 

» 



> > >> ) 

:>> » 

v ^ )> » 
> » > 



» 7> > 

2>> > > 

^D ) > 



> > 

> > 

> y 



> > > 
> > 



3*5 






Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION ' 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 160 
(724)779-2111 



v> > ISO* 3> 



» > ^CO 
» »^> 

» 3» > 
3^ }> > 

> > » :> 

>^ »> 

;> ■» y» 

X> » £> > > 

» )>> >/> 

>> > ^> 












>> > 






> > > > 

» > > > 

>> > X) tt> 

» > >> » 

> >^ >> 
:>> >> 

► » 3> 

» >> 



> > > 

^> >: 








•M 


> 


> 


>^ 


U> 


)) 


O ) 


» 


>> 


>J> 


J3^> 


> 


> > 


^^> 


» 


> ^ 


*> 




> 


^> > 


'> 


> ^> ' 


»3 






^»>> 




> "> 


^>> 




Z> > 


>j >> 




> > 


> >■> ■> 




> > 


> "> > 




^> ^ 


o » 




^ \> 


^> ^> 




>2l 


► ) ^> 5^> 


"S 


> > 


^ >:> 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 039 462 2 



■■. 







iff 



■ 



1 






1 

If? 



n 






